The Mystery of the Gospel Vindicated and Socinianism Examined

CHAP. XXIII.

Of the Death of Christ, as it was a punishment, and the Satisfaction made thereby.

SO is the Death of Christ revealed as a Price, and a Sacrifice; what are the proper effects of it, under these considerations, shall be afterward declared.

The 3 ^d consideration of it, is, its being a penalty, or a punishment. To clear this, I shall demonstrate four things.

1. What Punishment properly so called, is.

2. That Christ's death was a punishment, or that in his Death he did undergo punishment.

3. What that was that Christ underwent, or the material cause of that punishment.

4. Wherein the formallity of its being a punishment did consist; or whence that dispensation had its equity.

For the first. I shall give the definition of it, or the description of its general nature.

2. The Ends of it are to be considered.

For the first, that usual general description seemeth to be comprehensive of the whole nature of punishment; it is, malum passionis, quod infl • gitur ob malum actionis, An evil of suffering inflicted for doing evil▪ Or more largely to describe it; it is an Effect of justice in him, who hath sovereign Power, and Right, to order and dispose of offenders, whereby he that doth contrary to the Rule of his actions, is recompensed with that which is evil to himself, according to the demerit of his fault.

1. It is an Effect of Justice; hence God's punishing is often called an inflicting of Anger; as Rom. 3. 5. is God unrighteous, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; who inflicteth Anger? Anger is put for the justice of God, Rom. 1. 18. the Anger, or Wrath of God is revealed from Heaven, &c. That is, his vindict • ve justice against sin▪ is manifested by its effects; and again, the Cause for the Effect. Anger for the effect of it in punishment. And therefore we have translated the word vengeance, Rom. 3. 5. which denotes the punishment it self.

2. It is of him, who hath Sovereign Power, and Judiciary Right to dispose of the Offenders; and this is either immediate in God himself, as in the case whereof we speak: He is the only Law giver, who is able to save, and to destroy, Jam. 4. 12. or it is by him delegated to men, for the use of human Society; so Christ tells Pilate, he could have no Power over him (whom he considered as a Malefactor) unless it was given him from above., Joh. 19. 11. though that is spoken in reference to that peculiar dispensation.

3. The Nature of it consists in this, that it be evil to him, on whom it is inflicted; either by the immission of that which is Corrupting, vexing, and destroying, or the subtraction of that which is cheering, useful, good, and desirable, in what kind soever: And therefore did the Ancients call punishment fraus, because when it came upon men, they had deceived, and cut short themselves of some good, that otherwise they might have enjoyed. So the Historian, Caeterae multitudini diem statuit, antequam liceret sine fraud ab armis discedere: that is, that they might go away freely, without punishment. And so is that expression explained by Ulpian, Dig. lib. 20. Capitalem fraudem admittere, est tale aliquid delinquere, propter quod, capite puniendus sit.

The Schoolmen have two Rules that pass amongst them without control. 1. That Omne peccatum est adeo voluntarium▪ ut si non sit voluntarium non est peccatum. It is so of the nature of sin, that it be voluntary, that if anything be not voluntary, it is not sin. The other is, est ex naturâ poenae ut sit involuntaria: it is so of the nature of Punishment, that it be against the will of him that is punished, that if it be not so, it is not punishment.

Neither of which Rules is true, yea the latter is undoubtedly false. For the first, every sin is thus far indeed voluntary, that what is done contrary to the express will of him that doth it, is not his sin; but that the actual will, or willing of the sinner is required, to make anything his sin, is false. In the case of original sin manifestly; wherefore John gives us another definition of sin then theirs is, that it is, dictum, factum, concupitum contra legem; namely, that it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a transgression of the Law; have it the actual consent of the will or no, if it be a Transgression of the Law, an inconformity to the Law, it is sin.

For the latter, it is true indeed, that for the most part it falls out, that everyone that is to be punished, is unwilling to undergo it; and there is an improper nolleity (if I may so speak) in nature, unto the subtracting of any good from it, or the immission of any evil upon it; yet as to the perfection of the nature of punishment, there is no more required, then what was laid down in general before, that there be malum passionis, ob malum actionis, a suffering of evil for doing of evil, whether men will or no. Yea men may be willing to it, as the Soldiers of Caesar after their defeat at Dyrrachium, came to him, and desired that they might be punished, more antiquo: being ashamed of their flight. But what ever really or personally is evil to a man for his evil, is punishment; though chiefly among the Latins, punishment relates to things real: capital revenges had another name. Punishments were chiefly pecuniary, as Servius on that of Virgil: Post m • hi non simili paena commissa luetis: luetis: persolvetis: & hic sermo a pecunia descendit, antiquorum enim poenae omnes pecuniariae fuerunt. And supplicium is of the same importance. Punishments were called supplicia, because with the mulcts of men, they sacrificed, and made their supplications to God; whence the word is sometimes used for that worship; as in Salustius, describing the old Romans, he says they were in suppliciis Deorum magnifici.

4. There is the procuring cause of it, which is, doing evil, contrary to the Law and Rule, whereby the Offender ought to walk, and regulate his actings and proceedings: omnis poena, si justa est, peccati poena est, says Aug. indeed not only s • justa est, but si poena est; taking it properly, Offence must precede punishment.

And whatever evil befalls any, that is not procured by offense, is not properly punishment, but hath some other name and nature. The name poena, is used for anything that is vexatious or troublesome, any toil or labor, as in the Tragedian, speaking of one who tired himself with travail in hunting: Quid te ipse poenis gravibus infestus gravas but improperly is it thus used. This Abraham evinceth in his plea with God, Gen. 18. 25. That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked; and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: shall not the judge of all the Earth do right? It is of God as the Judge of all the Earth of whom he speaks; that is, of him that hath the supreme power of disposing of offenders; and of his Justice inflicting; which as I said, was the cause of punishment. It is that, whereby God doth right: and he gives the procuring cause of all punishment, the wickedness of men; that be far from thee, to destroy the righteous with the wicked. And therefore that place of Job, chap. 9. 22. This is one thing, therefore I said it, he destroys the perfect and the wicked: Is not to be understood absolutely, but according to the subject of the dispute in hand, between him and Bildad. Bildad says, chap. 8. 20. That God will not cast away a perfect man. that is, he will not afflict a godly man to death. He grants that a Godly man may be afflicted, which Eliphas his companion seemed to deny: yet says he, he will not cast him away, that is, leave him without relief from that Affliction, even in this Life. To this Jobs answer is, this is one thing; that is, one thing I am resolved on, and therefore I said it, and will abide by it, he destroyeth the perfect and the wicked; not only Wicked men are destroyed, and cut off in this life, but Perfect men also; but yet in this very destruction, as there is a difference in the persons, one being perfect, the other wicked: So there is in God's dealing with them; one being afflicted to the door of Heaven, the other cursed into Hell. But for punishment properly so called, the cause is sin, or the offense of the person punished. And therefore in the Hebrew, the same words (many of them) signify both sin & punishment, so near & indissoluble is their relation. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Plut. de Serâ Numin. vindicta.

5. The measure of any penalty, is the demerit of the offense: it is a rendering to men, as for their works, so according to them

I shall not trouble the Reader with the Heathens Apprehension of Rhadamanthean Righteousness, and the exact rendering to every one according to his Desert even in another world.

There is a twofold Rule of this proportion of sin and punishment: The one constitutive, the other declarative. The Rule constitutive of the proportion of penalty for sin, is the infinitely wise, Holy, and Righteous will of God. The Rule declarative of it is the Law.

For the first, It is his Judgment that they which commit sin are worthy of Death, Rom. 1. 32. This the Apostle fully declares: Chap. 2. 5, 6, 7, 8. 9, 10. The day of punishing, he calls the day of the Revelation of the Righteous Judgment of God. That is, what his Judgment is concerning the demerit of sin. The world shall then know, what in Justice he requires for the due vengeance of it. And this according to his Will, v▪ 6. He will in his Righteous judgment render to everyone according to his deeds.

And here it is to be observed, that though there be an exceeding great variation in sin, in respect of degrees, so that some seem as mountains, others in comparison of them but as molehills, yet it is the general nature of sin, (which is the Creatures subducting its self from under the Dominion of God, and dependence upon him,) that punishment original is suited unto: Whence death is appointed to every sin, and that eternal; wherein the degrees of punishment vary not the kind.

2. * For the several kinds of punishment (I call them so, in a general acceptation of both words) they are distinguished according to their ends, and Causes: the ends of punishments, or all such things as have in them the nature of punishments, may be referred to the ensuing heads.

1. The first End of punishment, is, the good of him that is punished, and this is twofold. 1. For Amendment, and recovery from the evil, and sin that he hath committed. This kind of punishing is frequently mentioned in Scripture; so eminently Levite. 26. doth the Lord describe it at large, and insists upon it, reckoning up in a long series, a Catalogue of several judgments; he interposing, But if ye shall not be REFORMED by these things, but will walk contrary to me, as v. 25. then will I do so, and so, or add this, or that punishment to them foregoing: and this in reference to the former end of their Reformation; & the success of this proceedure we find variously expressed: sometimes the end of it in some measure was fulfilled, Psal. 18. 32, 33, 34, 35. sometimes otherwise, Isai. 1. 5. Why should you be smitten anymore? you will revolt more and more; intimating, that the end of the former smiting was to cure their revoltings. And this kind of punishment is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , correction for instruction; and is not punishment in its strict, and proper sense.

2. For the taking off of sinners, to prevent such other wickednesses as they would commit, should patience be exercised towards thē. The very Heathen saw, that he that was wicked & not to be reclaimed, it was even good for him, & to him, that he should be destroyed. Such an one as Plutarch says, was, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hurtful to others, but most of all to himself. How much more is this evident to us, who know that future judgments shall be proportionably increased to the wickedness of men in this world; & if every drop of Judgment in the world to come, be incomparably greater, then the greatest & heaviest a man can possibly suffer in this life, or loose his life by, it is most evident, that a man may be punished with death for his own good: mitius punientur. This is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And this hath no place in human Administrations of punishments, when they arise to death it self: men cannot kill a man, to prevent their dealing worse with him, for that is their worst; they can do no more says our savior; but accidentally it may be for his good. Generally 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is as Aristotle speaks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : and is thereby differenced from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (of which afterwards) which as he says, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is one not corrected, not restrained, incastigatus. And therefore the punishment of death cannot at all properly be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : but cutting off by God to prevent farther sin, hath in it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 thereunto.

2. The second end of punishment, which gives a second kind of them in the general sense before mentioned, is for the good of others, and this also is various.

1. For the good of them that may be like minded with him that is punished; that they may be deterred, affrighted, and persuaded from the like evils. This was the end of the punishing of the presumptuous sinner, Deut. 17. 12, 13. That man shall die, and all the people shall hear, & fear, and do no more presumptuously. The people; that is any among them that was like minded unto him that was stoned & destroyed. So in some places they have taken Lions that have destroyed men, and hung them on crosses, to fright others that should attempt the like. Hence exemplum, is sometimes put absolutely for punishment because punishment is for that end. So in the Comedian, Quae futura exempla dicunt in eum indigna: on which place Donatus, graves poenae, quae possunt caeteris documento esse, exempla dicuntur. And this is a tacit end in human punishment. I do not know that God hath committed any pure Revenge unto men: That is, punishing with a mere respect to what is past. Nor should one man destroy another, but for the good of others. Now the good of no man lies in revenge. The content that men take therein, is their sin, and cannot be absolutely good to them. So the Philosopher, nemo prudens punit quia peccatum est, sed ne peccetur; revoc • ri enim praeterita non possunt, futura prohibeantur. And Rom. 13. 4. If ye do that which is evil, be afraid, &c. See what he hath done to others, and be afraid.

2. It is for the good of others, that they may not be hurt in the like kind, as some were by the sin of him who is punished for it. This seems to be the main end of that great fundamental Law of human society, Let him that hath killed by violence be killed, that the rest of men may live in peace. And these kinds of punishments in reference to this end are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Examples: that others by impunity be not enticed to evil, and that the residue of men may be freed from the harm that is brought upon them, by reason of such evils.

Hence the Historian says, that Commonwealths should rather be mindful of things done evilly, then of good turns: the forgetfulness of the latter, is a discouragement to some good, but of the former an encouragement to all licentiousness. Thus Joseph suspecting his espoused consort, yet refused 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to make an open example of her by punishment. And these punishments are thus called from their use, and not from their own nature: and therefore differ not from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but only as to the end and use from whence they have their denomination.

3. The good of him that punisheth is aimed at, and this is proper to God. Man punisheth not, nor can, nor ought, for his own good, or the Satisfaction of his own justice; but God made all things for himself, and the wicked for the day evil, Prov. 16. 4. and Rom. 9. 22. and in God's dealing with men, whatever he doth unless it be for this end, it is not properly punishment.

This is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , vindicta noxae; purely the recompensing of the evil that is committed, that it may be revenged. This (I say) in God's dealing is properly punishment, the revenge of the evil done, that himself, or his justice may be satisfied, as was seen before, from Rom. 2. 7, 8, 9. verse. Whatever of evil God doth to any, which is therefore called punishment, because it partaketh of the general nature of punishment, and is evil to him that is punished; yet if the intendment of God be not to revenge the evil past upon him, in a proportion of Law, it is not punishment properly so called. And therefore it will not suffice to prove that Believers are, or may be punished for sin, to heap up Texts of Scripture, where they are said to be punished, and that in reference to their sin; unless it can be also proved, that God doth it animo ulciscendi, and that their punishment is vindicta noxae, and that it is done 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : but of this I am not now to treat. The Reader may hence see what punishment is in general; what are the ends of it, and its kinds from thence; & what is punishment from God, properly so called. It is vindicta noxae, animo ulciscendi, ut ipsi satisfiat: and this kind of punishment was the death of Christ: which is to be proved.

3. That the death of Christ was a punishment properly so called, which is the third consideration of it, as I said, is next to be proved. Of all the places of Scripture and Testimonys whereby this may be demonstrated, I shall fix only on one portion of Scripture: and that is Isai. 53. What in particular shall be produced from thence; will appear when I have given some general Considerations of the Chapter, which I shall do at large, as looking on that Portion of Scripture as the sum of what is spoken in the Old Testament, concerning the Satisfactory Death of Jesus Christ.

1. This whole Prophesy from▪ v. 13. of chap. 52. which is the head of the present Discourse, is evinced to belong to the Messias, against the Jews.

1. Because the Chaldee Paraphrast, one of their most ancient Masters, expressly names the Messias, and interprets that whole Chapter of him; behold (saith he) my servant the Messias shall deal prudently. And the Ancient Rabbins, as is abundantly proved by others, were of the same mind. Which miserably intangles their present obdurate Masters, who would fixe the Prophesy upon any, rather then on the Messias. Seeing evidently, that if it be proved to belong to the Messias in Thesi, it can be applied to none other in Hypothesi, but Jesus of Nazareth.

2. Because they are not able to find out, or fixe on any one whatever, to whom the things here spoken of, may be accomodated. They speak indeed of Jeremiah, Josiah, a righteous man in general, the whole people of Israel; of Messiah Ben Joseph, a man of Straw of their own setting up; but it is easy to manifest, were that our present work, that scarce any one Expression, in this Prophesy, much less all, do or can agree to any one, or all of them named, so that it must be brought home to its proper subject: of this at large in the ensuing digression against Grotius.

3. That to us it is evident above all contradiction, that the whole belongs to Jesus Christ; because not only paticular Testimonies are taken from hence in the New Testament and applied to him, as Mat. 8. 17. Mark. 15 28. Luk. 22. 37. Rom 10. 16. but it is also expounded of him in general for the Conversion of souls, Act. 8. 28. The story is known of Philip and the Eunuch.

3. This is such a Prophesy of Christ, as belongs to him not only properly, but immediately: that is, it doth not in the first place point out any Type of Christ, and by him shadow out Christ, as it is in sundry Psalms, where David and Solomon are firstly spoken of, though the Messias be principally intended: but here is no such thing. Christ himself is immediately spoken of. Socinus says indeed, that he doubted not but that these things did primarily belong to another, could he be discovered, who he was; and that from Him was the Allusion taken, and the Accommodation made to Christ: and if (saith he) it could be found out who he was, much light might be given into many expressions in the Chapter. But this is a bold figment, for which there is not the least countenance given either from Scripture or reason; which is evidently decried from the former Arguments, whereby the impudency of the Jews is confounded: And shall be farther in the ensuing digression where it shall be proved that it is impossible to fix on any one but Jesus Christ, to whom the several expressions, and matters expressed in this Prophesy may be accommodated.

2. Now there are three general parts of this Prophesy, to consider it with Reference to the business in hand: As the seat of this Truth in the Old Testament.

1. A description given of Christ, in a mean, low, miserable condition, from v. 14. of Chap. 52. to v. 5. of Chap. 53. His visage was marred, and his form, more then the Sons of men, he hath no form, nor comeliness v. 2. No beauty, a man of grief, and sorrows, despised, neglected, acquainted with grief, v. 3. looked on as stricken and afflicted of God. v. 4.

2. The Reason is given of this Representation of the Messias, of whom it is said in the entrance of the Prophesy, that he should deal prudently, and be exalted, and extolled, and be very high. To which this description of him seems most adverse and contrary. The Reason (I say) hereof is given from v. 5. to the 10. it was on the account of his being punished, and broken for us, and our sins.

3. The issue of all this from v. 10. to the end, is the Justification and Salvation of Believers.

It is the second that I shall insist upon, to prove the Death of Christ, to have in it the nature of punishment, properly and strictly so called.

Not to insist upon all the particular passages, that might be done to great advantage, and ought to be done, did I purpose the through, and full handling of the business before me, (but I am in transitu, and pressing to • omewhat farther) I shall only urge two things.

1. The Expressions throughout, that describe the state and condition of Christ as here proposed.

2. One or two singular Assertions, comprehensive of much of the rest.

For the the first, let the Reader consider what is contained in the several words, here setting forth the condition of Christ: we have, despising and rejecting, sorrow and grief, v. 4. He was stricken, smitten, afflicted; or there was striking, smiting, affliction on him. Wounded, bruised, chastised with stripes, v. 5. wounding, bruising, chastising unto sorenesse, oppressed, stricken, cut off, killed, brought to slaughter, v. 7, 8, 9. Bruised, sacrificed, and his soul made a • offering for sin▪ v. 10.

Now certainly for the material part, or the matter of punishment, here it is abundantly: here is malum passionis in every kind. Immission of evil, subtraction of Good in soul and body: here is plentiful measure heaped up, shaken together, and running over.

But it may be said, though here be the matter of punishment, yet it may be all this was for some other end; and so it may be it was ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ,) not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , or punishment properly so called.

Consider then the ends of punishment before insisted on▪ and see what of them is applicable to the Transaction▪ between God and Christ here mentioned.

1. Was it for his own Correction? No says the Prophet, v. 9. He had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth: He was perfectly innocent. So that he had no need of any Chastisement for his Amendment; and so signally in sundry places, where mention is made of the Death of Christ, his own spotless innocence is often pleaded. Neither was it for his instruction that he might be wise, and instructed in the will of God; for at the very entrance of the Prophesy, Chap. 52. 13. he says, he shall deal prudently and be exalted. He was Faithful before in all things. And though he experimentally learned obedience, by his sufferings, yet habitually to the utmost his ears were bored, and himself prepared to the will of God, before the afflictions here principally intended. Neither

3. Was He 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; punished for example; to be made en example to others, that they might not offend: For what can offenders learn from the punishment of one who never offended: He was • ut off, but not for himself: and the end assigned v. 11. 12. which is not the Instruction only, but the justification, and Salvation of others, will not allow this end. He shall justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities; H • set us an example in his Obedience; but he was not punished for an Example. Neither

4. Was it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a suffering to bear witness and Testimony to the Truth. There is no mention of any such end in this place. Yea to make that the main intendment here, is a monstrous figment. The expressions all along as we shall see in the next place, are, that all this was for our transgressions, for our sins, for our iniquities, for our peace. God wounded, bruised, killed him, fo • ou • iniquities▪ that is, he died to bear witness to his Doctrine▪ Credat Ap • lla.

2. Then, the matter of punishment being expressed, see the cause of the infliction of it. It was for Transgressions, for iniquities, v. 5. For wandering and iniquity, v. 6. For Transgressions, v. 8. For sin, v 12. Let us now remember the general description of punishment that was given at the beginning; It is Malum passionis quod infligitur ob malum actionis, and see how directly it suits with this punishment of Jesus Christ. 1. Here is malum passionis inflicted, wounding, bruising, killing. And 2. there is malū actionis deserving, sin, iniquity, and transgression. How these met on an innocent person, shall be afterwards declared. 2. Go along to the peculiar description of punishment properly so called, as managed by God. It is vindicta noxae; now if all other ends and causes whatever, as of Chastisement or Example, &c. be removed, and this only be asserted, then this Affliction of Christ was vindicta noxae, punishment in the most proper sense; but that these ends are so removed hath been declared upon the particular consideration of them.

And this is the first Argument from this place to prove; that the Death of Christ and his suffering, hath the nature of punishment.

2. The second is, from the more particular expressions of it to this purpose, both on the part of the person punishing, and on the part of the person punished: a single expression on each part may be insisted on.

1. On the part of God punishing, take that of v. 6. The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all: of which sort also is that of v. 10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him, he put him to grief, when th • u shalt make his soul an offering for sin.

2. On the part of him punished, v. 11▪ He shall bear • their iniquities. From the consideration of these expressions, we shall evidently evince what we have proposed. Of these in the next Chapter.

CHAP. XXIIII.

Some particular Testimonies evincing the Death of Christ to be a punishment, properly so called.

THE two Expressions that I chose in particular to consider, are nextly to be insisted on.

The first relates to Him, who did inflict the punishment. The other to him that was punished.

The first in v. 6. The Lord laid on him the iniquityes of us all. The person punishing, is Jehovah, the person punished called Him; that is, he who is spoken of throughout the whole Prophesy; the Messiah Jesus Christ, as above declared.

For the opening of the words, that the efficacy of them to our purpose in hand may appear. Two of them are especially to be considered. 1. What is meant by that which is rendered l • id on Him, 2. What is meant by Iniquity.

The first by our Translation is rendered in the Margent, Made to meeet; He made to meet; • n him the iniquities of us all; The vulgar Latin, posuit Dominus ineo. The Lord put upon him according to our Translation in the Text. Montanus, dominus fecit occurrere. in • um. God hath caused to meet on him, according to our Translation in the Margent. Junius to the same purpose. Jehov • h fecit ut incurrat, the Lord made them meet, & fall on him. The Septuagint render it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Lord delivered him to our sins, that is, to be punished for them. By others the word is rendered impegit, trad • xit, conj • cit, all to the same purpose, importing an act of God in conveying our sins to Christ.

The word here used is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; its Root is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to which all the significations mentioned, are assigned; Occurrere, obviam ire, incurrere, aggredi, rogare, precari: The first general signification of it is to meet, as the bounds of a Field, or Country, or house, meet with one another. Joshua 19. 34. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 So all along in that chapter, where the bounds of one Country, are said to reach to another; that is, to meet with them; it is the word here used. So in voluntary Agents, it is obviam ire, or to meet, and that either for good or evil; for good it is spoken of God, Psal 64. 5. thou meetest him, &c. and so for evil Amos▪ 5. 19. as if a man fled from a Lyon, and a Bear meet him: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, to tear him in pieces. Hence because men that met others, went to them, to desire some help of them, the word also signifies to ask, to pray, entreat, or intercede; so the word is used Isa. 59. 16. there was no entreater, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 none to meet, to come and ask. And in this very chap. v. 12. he made intercession for the transgressors; the word is the same with that here used▪ to meet the Lord, and intercede for transgressors, to stay his hand against them, is its sense.

2. To meet, or to make to meet properly, which is the First, and most clear sense of the word. It is often used for to meet animo hostili, to meet, to fall upon for hurt, 1 Sam. 2 • . 17. the servants of the King would not put forth the hand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to meet, that is, as we have translated it, to fall upon the Priests and kill them; so 2 Sam. 1. 15. David bid his young man arise, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 fall upon the Amalekite, that is, to kill him. Judge. 15. 1 • . Sampson made the men of Judah swear that they would not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meet with him, or fall on him themselves.

Nextly, it may be inquired in what sense the word is here used, whether in the first spoken of, to ask, entreat, intercede; or in the latter, to meet; or to meet with.

Grotius interpreteth it, (to remove, so much of his interpretation by the way) permisit Deus, ut ill nostro gravi crimine indignissima pateretur; that so he might suit what is spoken to Jeremiah, without pretence or color of proof. For the word, it is 46 times used in the Old Testament, and if in any one of them it may be truly rendered permisit, as it is done by him, or to that sense, let it be here so applied also. And for that sense, which is, that God suffered the Jews by their wi • kednesse to entreat him evilly, it is most remote from the intendment of the words, and the Holy Ghost in them.

1. First then, that the words cannot be interpreted to pray, or intercede, is evident frō the contexture; wherein it is said (in this sense) he prayed him for the iniquity of us all; that is, the Lord prayed Christ for the iniquities of us all. This sense of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this place, Socinus himself grants not to be proper, nor consistent. Porro significatio illa, precari, in loco nostro locum habere non potest; alioqui sequeretur Isaiam voluisse dicere, Deum fecisse, ut omnium nostrûm iniquitas per Christum, vel pro Christo precata fuerit, quod longe absurdissimum esse nemo non videt▪ cap. 21. p. 132. Praelec. Socin.

2. It is then to meet: now the word here used being in Hiphil, which makes a double Action of that expressed by adding the Cause, by whose Power, virtue, and impress, the thing is done; thence it is here rendered occurrere fecit, he made to meet, and so the sense of it is, God made our sins, as it were, to set upon, or to fall upon Jesus Christ, which is the most common use of the word, as hath been shown.

It is objected, that the word signifies to meet, yet no more but this may be the meaning of them; God in Christ met with all our iniquities; that is, for their pardoning, and removal, & taking away▪

Of the many things that may be given in for the eversion of this Gloss, I shall name only two, whereof the first is to the word, the latter to the matter. For the word; the Conjugation according to the common Rule, enforces the sense formerly mentioned; he made to meet, and not he met.

2. The Prophet in these words renders a reason of the contemptible sad condition of the Messiah, at which so many were scandalized, and whereupon so few believed the report of the Gospel concerning him; and this is, that God laid on him our iniquities; now there is no reason why he should be represented in so deplorable a state and condition, if God only met with, & prevented our sin, in and by him, which he did (as they say) in his Resurrection, wherein he was exceeding Glorious; so that the meaning of the word is, that God made our sins to meet on him, by laying them on him; and this sense Socinus himself consents unto, Praelec. cap. 21. p. 133. But this also will farther appear in the explication of the next word: and that is, our iniquities.

He hath laid on him the Iniquities of us all. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 How the Iniquity of us, that is, the punishment of our iniquity? I shall offer three things, to make good this interpretation.

1. That the word is often found in that sense; so that it is no new, or uncouth thing, that here it should be so, Gen. 4. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mine iniquity is greater then I can bear, it is the same word here used; they are the words of Cain, upon the denunciation of God's judgment on him; and what iniquity it is, he gives you an account in the next words, behold thou hast cast me out, v▪ 14. that was only the punishment▪ laid on him. It is used in like manner several times Levite. 20. 17, 19. and 1 Sam. 28. 10. Saul swear to the Witch, that no iniquity should be fall her; that is, no punishment for that which she did at his command, in raising up a Spirit to consult withal, contrary to the Law. And also in sundry other places: so that this is no new signification of the word, and is here most proper.

2. It appears from the explication that is given of this thing in many other expressions is the Chapt. God laid on him the iniquity of us all. How? in that it pleased him to bruise him, and put him to grief, v. 10. In that he was wounded for our transgressions, and he was bruised for our iniquities, v. 5. as will be made more evident when I come to the next Phrase: He bare our iniquities, which answers to this, He laid them on him.

3. Because he did so lay our sin on Christ, that he made his Soul an offering for sin: when our iniquities were on him, his Soul▪ that is, He, by an usual Synecdoche, (the Soul for the Person) was made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an off • ring for sin; the word here used, is like piaculum in Latin, which signifies the fault, and him who is punished for it in a way of a public Sacrifice: So is this word taken both for a sin, a trespass, and a Sacrifice for the exp • ation of it. As another word, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used also Lev. 4. 3. He shall offer it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for a sin; that is, an Offering for sin; So also Exod 29. 14. Lev. 4. 29. And this very word is so used Levite: 7. 2. They shall kill 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, the sin, or sin offering, or trespass offering, as there it is rendered: and other instances might be given. Now God did so cause our iniquities to meet on Christ, that he then under th • m made himself 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or an offering for sin. Now in the offering for sin, the penalty of the Offence was, suo more, laid on the beast, that was Sacrificed or made an offering; Paul interpreteth these words by other expressions, 2 Cor. 5. 21. he made him to be a sin for us, that is, an offering for sin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ He made him sin, when he made him a Curse▪ the curse of the Law, Gal: 3. 13▪ that is, gave him up to the Punishment, by the Law due to sin: Rom. 8. 3. God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for sin, a Sacrifice for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, Heb: 10. 6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in burnt Offerings, & for sin thou hadst no pleasure; and again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . It appears then from all that hath been said, that our iniquities that were laid on Christ, were the punishment due to our iniquity.

Farther to clear this, I shall a little consider what Act of God this was, whereby he laid our iniquities on Christ; and these two things are considerable therein.

1. How it was typically prefigured.

2. How it was done, or in what Act of God the doing of it doth consist.

1. This was eminently represented in the great Anniversary Sacrifice, of which I have spoken formerly; especially in that part which concerns the Goat, on which the Lot fell to be sent away: That that Goat was a Sacrifice, is evident from the 5. v. where both the Kids of the Goats, (afterward said to be two Goats) are said to be a Sin Offering; how this was dealt withal, see v. 21. Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the live Goat, & confess our sin, all the iniquities of all the people, all their transgressions in all their sins, & put them upon the Head of the Goat, Now in what sense could the sins of the People, be put upon the Head of the Goat.

1. This was not merely a Representation; as it were a Shew or Pageant, to set forth the taking away of iniquity; but Sins were Really, as to that Typicall Institution, laid on the Head of the Goat: whence he became a p • aculum, an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; and he that touched him was defiled, so v. 26. The Man that carried out the Goat, was unclean until he was legally purified, and that because the Sin of the People was on the Head of the Goat, which he so carri • d away.

2. The proper prav • ty, malice, and filth of sin, could not be laid on the Goat. Neither the Nature of the thing, nor the Subject will bear it; for neither is Sin, which is a Privation, an irregularity, an obliquity, such a thing, as that it can be translated from one to another, although it hath an Infectious, and a Contagious quality to diffuse it self, that is, to beget some • thing of the like nature in others: nor was the Goat a Subject wherein any such pernicious or depraved habit might reside, which belongs only to Intelligent Creatures, which have a moral Rule to walk by.

3. It must be the punishment of Sin, that is here intended, which was in the Type laid on the head of the Goat; And therefore it was sent away into a Land not inhabited, a Land of separation, a Wilderness, there to perish, as all the Jewish Doctors agree: that is, to undergo the Punishment that was inflicted on him; That in such Sacrifices for sin, there was a real imputation of sin unto punishment, shall afterwards be farther cleared.

Unto this Transaction doth the Prophet allude in this expression, he Laid on, or put on him. As the High Priest confessed all the sins, Iniquities, & Transgressions of the people & laid thē on the Head of the scape Goat, which he bare, undergoing the utmost punishment he was capable of, and that punishment, which in the general kind and nature is the punishment, due to sin, an evil and violent death. So did God lay all the sins, all the punishment due to them, really upon one that was fit, able, and appointed to bear it, which he suffered under to the utmost, that the Justice of God required on that account. He th • n took a view of all our sins and iniquityes; He knew what was past and what was to come, knowing all our thoughts a far off. Not the least error of our minds, darkness of our understandings, perverseness of our Wills, Carnallity of our affections, sin of our nature, or lives, escaped him. All were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before him. This is set out by the variety of expressions used in this matter in the Type; all the iniquities, all the transgressions, & all the sins▪ And so by every word whereby we express sin, in this 53. of Isaiah: going astray, tur • ing aside, iniquity, transgression, sin, and the like▪ God (I say) made them all to meet on Christ in the punishment due to them.

2. What is the Act of God, whereby he casts ou • sins on Christ.

I have elsewhere considered, how God in this business is to be looked on: I said now in the entrance of this Discourse, that Punishment is an effect of Justice in him, who had power to dispose of the offender as such. To this two things are required.

1. That he have in his hand power to dispose of all the concernments of the offense and sinner, as the Governor of Him and them all. This is in God. He is by nature the King and Governor of all the world. O • r Lawgiver, Jam. 4. 12. Having made rational Creatures, an • required obedience at their hands, it is essentially belonging to him to be their Governor, and not only to have the sovereign disposal of them, as he hath the supreme dominion over them, with the legal dispose of them, in answer to the moral subjection to him, and the obedience he requires of them.

2. That as he be a King, and have supreme government, so he be a Judge to put in execution his Justice. Thus God is judge himself. Psal. 50. 6. He is the Judge of the world. Gen. 18. 25. Psal. 94. 2. Psal. 75. 7. Is. 33. 22. as in innumerable other places: Now as God is thus the great Governor & Judge, he pursues the constitutive principle of punishment, his own righteous and holy Will, proportioning penaltyes to the demerit of sin.

Thus in the laying our sin on Christ, there was a twofold Act of God: one as a Governor, the other as a Judge properly.

1. The first is, innovatio obligationis, the innovation of the obligation, wherein we were detained, and bound over to punishment. Whereas in the Tenour of the Law as to its obligation unto punishment, there was none originally but the name of the Offender, In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die: and Cursed is everyone that continues not: and the soul that sinneth it shall die; God now puts in the name of the surety of Jesus Christ; that he might bccome responsible for our sins, and undergo the punishment that we were obliged to. Christ was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he was made under the Law; that is, he was put into subjection, to the Obligation of it unto punishment: God put his name into the obligation, and so the Law came to have its Advantage against him, who otherwise was most free from the charge of it. Then was Christ made sin, when by being put into the Obligation of the Law, he became liable to the punishment of it. He was the Mediator of the new Covenant, the Mediator between God and man, 1 Tim. 2. 5. So a Mediator, as to lay down his life a ransom for them, for whō he was a Mediator, v. 6. & the surety of the Covenan • is he also Heb. 7. 22. Such a surety, as paid that which he never took, made satisfaction for those sins which he never did.

2. The second Act of God as a Judge, is inflictio poenae. Christ b • ing now made obnoxious, and that by his own consent, the Justice of God finding him in the Law, layeth the weight of all on him. He had done no violence, neither was any deceit found in his mouth; well then, it will be well with him: surely it shall be well with the innocent, no evil shall befall him; nay but said he v. 10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him, he hath put him to grief: Yea, but what was the reason of this? Why was this the will of God? why did this seem good to the Just Judge of all the world? The Reason is in the very next words, His soul was made an offering for sin, which before is expressed, he bare our grief, he was wounded for our transgressions; being made liable to them he was punished for them.

By that which is said it is evident from this first expression▪ or the Assignation of an Action to God in reference to him, that this Death of Christ was a punishment, He who had power to do it, bringing in him, (on his own voluntary offer) into the Obligation to punishment, and inflicting punishment on him accordingly.

The second expression whereby the same thing is farther convinced is on the part of him that was punished, & this in v. 4. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, or which is more evident v. 11. He shall bear their iniquities.

For the Right understanding of the words, I shall give a few brief previous observations, that may give light to the matter we treat of. And the first is,

1. That as this whole thing was done in the Justice of God, as hath been declared, so it was done by the Counsel and Appointment of God. The Apostles confess the Death of Christ to have proceeded thence, Act. 4. • 8. and Act. 2. 23. Now as laying of our sins on Christ, being designed our Mediator, and undertaking the work, was an act of God, as the Governor of all, and the righteous Judge, so this of the determinate counsel, and fore appointment, or the eternal designation of Christ to his office, is an Act of Sovereign power and Dominion in God, whereby he doth as he pleaseth, according to the Counsel of his will. As he would make the world in his sovereign good pleasure, when he might have otherwise done, Revel. 4▪ 11. So he would determine, that Christ should bear our iniquities, when he might otherwise have disposed of it, Rom. 11. 34, 35, 36, 37.

2. In respect of us, this preappointment of God was an act of Grace, that is, a sovereign Act of his good pleasure, whence all good things, all fruits of Love whatever to us do flow. Therefore it is called Love, Joh. 3. 16. and so in the fruit of it is it expressed, Rom. 8. 32. And on this John often insists in his Gospel and Epist: 1 Joh. 4. 9, 10, 11. His aim on his own part was the declaration of his Righteousness, Rom. 3. 25. and to make way for the praise of his glorious grace, Eph. 1. 6. on our parts, that we might have all those good things, which are the fruits of the most intense Love.

3. That Christ himself was willing to undergo this burden & undertake this work: & this as it is consistent with his death being a punishment, so it is of necessity to make good the other Considerations of it, namely, that it should be a price, and a Sacrifice. For no man gives a price, & therein parts with that which is precious to him unwillingly; nor is a Sacrifice acceptable that comes not from a free & willing mind. That he was thus willing himself professeth, both in the undertaking & carrying of it on; in the undertaking, Heb. 10. 9. Lo I come to do thy will O God: It is the Expression of one breaking out with a ready joy to do the thing proposed to him. So the Church of old looked on him, as one that came freely and cheerfully, Cant. 2. 8, 9. It is the voice of my beloved, behold he cometh leaping on the mountains, skipping on the hills: My Beloved is like a Roe, or a young Hart, he standeth behind the wall, he looketh forth at the window, showing himself through the Lattice. The Church looked on Christ as yet at a distance from the actual performance of the work he had undertaken, and so her self kept off from that clear and close Communion which she longed after, and thence she says of him, that he stood behind the wall, that He looked forth at the window, & shown himself at the lattices. There was a wall yet hindering the actual exhibition of Christ; the fullness of time was not come. The purpose of God was not yet to bring forth; but yet in the mean time, Christ looked on the Church through the window of the promise, and the Lattice of the Levitical ceremonies.

And what discovery do they make of him, in the view they take in the broad light of the Promises, and the many glimpses of the Ceremonial Types. They see him coming, leaping on the mountains, and skipping on the hills, coming speedily with a great deal of Joy and willingness.

So of himself he declares what his mind was from of old, from everlasting, Prov. 8. 30, 31. Rejoicing always before him, that is, before God his Father: but in what did he rejoice? in the habitable parts of the earth, & my delight was with the Sons of men. When this Joy of his was, he tells you v. 22, 23, 26, 27. He rejoiced before God his Father in the Sons of men, before they were created; that is, in the work he had to do for them.

His will was also in the carrying of it on unto Accomplishment, He must be doing his Fathers business, his Will who sent him. Luk. 12. 50. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . He was pained as a woman in travail to be delivered, to come to be baptized in his own blood. And when he was giving himself up to the utmost of it, He professes his readiness to it Joh. 18. 11. when Peter who once before would have advised him to spare himself, now being his Counsel was not followed, would have rescu • d him with his sword: As for his Advice he was called Satan, so for his proferd Assistance, he is now rebuked: and the reason of it is given, shall I not drink of the cup? It is true, that it might appear, that his death was not a Price, and a Sacrifice only, but a Punishment also, wherein there was an immission of everything that was evil to the suffering nature, and a subtraction of that which was Good, He discovered that averseness to the drinking of the Cup, which the Truth of the Human Nature absolutely required, (and which the amazing bitterness of the Cup overpowered him withal) yet still his will conquered and prevailed in all, Math. 26. 53, 54.

4. Christ his love was also in it, his delight was in the Sons of men; his love toward them carried him out to the work: And Paul proves it by the instance of himself, Gal. 2. 20. Who loved me. And John applies the same to all Believers, Revel. 1. 5, 6. To him that loved us, &c. And thus was this great work undertaken.

These things being premised, let us look again to the words under consideration.

1. For the Word he bare our Griefe v. 4. it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; A word of as large, and as many various Acceptions as any, if not absolutely the most extensive in the whole Hebrew tongue. It hath usually assigned unto it by the Lexicographer, eight or nine several significations: And to make it evident, that it is of various acceptions, It is used (in the Collections of Calasius ) 818 times in the Old Testament, whereof not a third part is answered in any language by one and the same word. With those senses of it, that are Metaphoricall, we have not anything to do. That which is the first, or most proper sense of it & what is most frequently used, is to carry or bear, & by which it is here translated as in very many other places.

Socinus would have it here be as much as abstulit, he took away, so saith he, God took away our sin in Christ, when by him he declared, and confirmed the way whereby Pardon and Remission is to be obtained; as he pardoned our sin in Christ, by discovering the new Covenant, and Mercy therein. Now because the Word is of such various significations, there is a necessity that it be interpreted by the Circumstances of the place where it is used. And because there is not any circumstance of the place, on the account whereof the word should be rendered abstulit, he took away, and not tulit, he took, bare, or suffered, we must consider what Arguments or Reasons are scraped together aliunde by them, and then evince what is the Proper signification of it, in this place.

1. This very expression is used of God Exod. 34. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ferens iniquitatem, as also 'tis again repeated, Numb. 14. 18. In both which places, we translate it forgiving, forgiving iniquities, transgressions, and sins. Nor can it be properly spoken of God, to bear: for God cannot bear, as the word properly signifies.

The sum of the Objection is; The word that is used so many times, and so often metaphorically, is once or twice in another place used for to take away, or to pardon; therefore this must be the sense of it in this place. God cannot be said to bear iniquities, but only metaphorically, & so he is often said to bear, to be pressed, to be weary, & made to serve with them; He is said to bear our sins, in reference to the end of bearing anything, which is to carry it away: God in Christ taking away, pard • ning our sins, is said to Bear them, because that is the way which sins are taken away; they are taken up, carried, and laid aside. But he of whom these words are spoken here, did bear properly, and could do so, as shall be shown.

2. The Interpretation of this place by Matthew, or the application of it is insisted on; which is of more importance, Math. 8. 16, 17. Christ curing the diseases of many, and bodily sicknesses, is said to bear our Griefes, according as it is said in Isaiah, that he should do. Now he did not bear our diseases, by taking them upon himself, and so becoming diseased, but morally, in that by his Power he took them away from them, in whom they were.

Not to make many Words, nor to multiply Interpretations, and Accommodations of these places, which may be seen in them, who have to good purpose made it their business to consider the parallel places of the Old and New Testaments, and to Reconcile them: I say only, it is no New thing to have the Effect and Evidence, and end of a thing, spoken of in the New Testament, in Answer to the Cause, and Rise of it, mentioned in the Old, by the application of the same words unto it which they are mentioned in. For instance, Paul Eph. 4. 8. citing that of the Psalmist, Psal. 68. 18. Thou hast ascended up on high, and hast led Captivity Captive, and received gifts for men; renders it; when he ascended up on high, he led Captivity Captive, and gave gifts unto Men; and that because his giving of them, was the end of his receiving of them; and his receiving of them, the Foundation of his giving of them▪ the Effect and Fruit being here expressed, the Foundation and Ground supposed.

So also, Mine ears hast thou bored, Psal. 40. is rendered, a body hast▪ thou prepared me, Heb: 10. because the end of the boring the ear of Christ was, that he might offer his body a Sacrifice to God; So it is here in this place of Matthew: Christ his taking away the bodily Distempers, and Sicknesses of men, was an Effect, and an Evidence of his taking away their sin, which was done by bearing of them; And therefore Matthew mentioning the Effect and Evidence of the thing, doth it in the Words that express the Cause and Foundation of it. Not, that, that was a complete Accomplishment of what was foretold, but that it was so demonstrated in the Effect and evidence of it. Nor do the Socinians themselves think that this was a full accomplishment of what is spoken by the Prophet, themselves insisting on another interpretation of the words: So that notwithstanding these exceptions, the Word here may have its Proper signification of bearing or carrying; which also that it hath, may be farther evidenced.

1. Here is no cogent Reason, why the Metaphoricall use of the Word should be understood. When it is spoken of God, there is a Necessity, that i • should be interpreted by the Effect; because Properly he cannot bear, nor undergo▪ grief, sorrow, or punishment. But as to the Mediator, the case is otherwise, For he confessedly underwent these things Properly, wherein we say that this word Bearing of Punishment doth consist; He was so bruised, so broken, so slain: So that there is no Reason to depart from the Propriety of the Word.

2. Those who would have the sense of the Word to be, to take away, in this place, confess it is by way of the Allusion before mentioned; that he that takes away a thing, takes it up, and bears it on his shoulders▪ or in his arms, until he lay it down; and by virtue of this Allusion doth it signify to take away. But why! seeing that taking up, and bearing, in this place is proper, as hath been shown, why must that be leaped over, and that which is Improper, and spoken by way of Allusion, be insisted on.

3. It appears that this is the Sence of the word, from all the circumstances of the Text, and Context. Take three that are most considerable.

1. The Subject spoken of, who did thus bear our Griefes; and this is Christ; of whom such things are affirmed, in Answer to this Question, How did he bear our Griefes? as will admit of no other sense: The Holy Ghost tells us how he did it, 1 Pet. 2. 24, 25. Who his ownselfe bare our sins in his body on the Tree. That Peter in that place expressed this part of the Prophesy of Isaiah, which we insist upon, is evident: The Phrase at the close of v. 24▪ and the beginning of v. 25▪ of this Chapter make it so: They are the very words of the end of the 5 & beginning of the 6 ^th verses here; How then did Christ bear our Griefes? Why in that he bare our sin in his own body on the Tree.

I shall not insist on the precise signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , here used, as though it expressed the outward manner of that suffering of Christ for sin, when he was lifted up on the Cross or Tree. It is enough, that our sins were on him, his body; that is, his whole human Nature, (by an usual Synecd • che ) when he was on the Tree; that he did it when he suffered in the flesh, Cap. 4. 1. He that did so bear our Griefe, sin, and iniquities, as to have them in his own body, when he suffered in the flesh, he is said properly therein tulisse, not abstulisse, to have borne, not taken away our Griefes. But that this is the Case, in Christ his bearing our Griefe, the Holy Ghost doth thus manifest.

2. The manner how Christ bare them evidently manifesteth, in what sense this expression is to be understood. He so bare them, that in doing so, he was wounded and bruised, grieved, chastised, s • ain, as it is at large expressed in the Context. Christ bare our Griefe, so as in doing of it, to be wounded, broken, grieved, killed, which is not to take them away, but really to bear them upon himself.

3. The Cause of this bearing our Griefe, is assigned to be Sin; He was wounded for our transgressions, as was shewn before: Now this cannot be the sense, for our sins, he took them away; but for our sins, He bare the punishment due to them, 2 Cor 5. 21.

4. To put all out of Question, the Holy Ghost in this Chapter useth another word in the same matter, with this, that will admit of no other Sence, then that which is proper. And that is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 v. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He shall bear their iniquities: and it is used immediately after this we have insisted on, as explicative of it; and carried our sorrows: Now as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 properly signifies to lift, to take up that which a man may carry, so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies to bear, and undergo the burden, that is taken, or that a man hath laid on his shoulders. And Matthew hath rendered this word by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is bajulo, p • rto; to bear a thing, as a man doth a burden on his shoulders; nor is it once used in the Scriptures, but it is either properly to bear a burden, or Metaphorically from thence, to undergo that which is h • avy and burthensome; Thus did Christ bare our Griefes, our Iniquities, by putting his shoulder under them, taking them on himself.

2. What did he thus bear? our Griefes, our Sins; or our Iniquities, our sins. Let us see by a second instance, what it is in the Language of God, To bear iniquities, and this Argument will be at an iss • e. Lament. 5. 7. Our Fathers have sinned, and are not, and we h • ve borne their ini • uitie. We have bo • ne their Iniquities, or the p • ni • hment that was d • e to them▪ They are not, they are gone out of the World, before the day of Recompence came, and we lie under the puni • hment threatened and inflicted for their sins, and our own Distinctly.

1. Men are said to bear their own sin, Levite: 19. 5. everyone that eateth it shall bear his iniquity; that is, he shall be esteemed guilty, and be punished: Levite. 20. 17. He shall bear his iniquity, is the same with he shall be killed, v. 16. and he shall be cut off from his people, v. 18. For a man to bear his iniquity, is constantly for him to answer the Guilt, and undergo the Punishment due to it.

2. So also of the sins of others, Numb. 14. 33. And your Children shall wander in the Wilderness forty years, and shall bear your whoredoms: bear your whoredoms; that is, my anger for them, and the punishment due to them. Numb. 30. 15. He that compels by his Power and Authority another to break a vow, shall himself be liable to the Punishment due to such a breach of Vow. Ezek. 18. 20. is an explanation of all these places: The soul that sins it shall die, it shall be punished, The Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father, &c. The Son shall not be punished for the sin of the Father▪ nor the Father for the sin of the Son. In brief, this expression, To bear iniquities, is never otherwise used in Scripture, but only for to undergo the Punishment due thereunto.

Thus much then we have clearly evinced. God did so lay our sins on Christ, as that he bare and underwent that which was due to them; God inflicting it on him, & he willingly undergoing it. Which is my second demonstration from this place, that the Death of Christ is also a punishment. Which is all that I shall urge to that purpose. And this is that, and all that we intend by the Satisfaction of Christ.

But now having laid so great stress as to our Doctrine under demonstration upon this place of the Prophet, and finding some attempting to take away our foundation, before I proceed, I shall divert to the consideration of the Annotations of Grotius on this whole chap & rescue it from his force & violence, used in contending to make what is here spoken to suit the Prophet Jeremiah, and to intend him in the first place: to establish which vain conjecture, he hath perverted the sense of the whole, and of every particular verse, from the beginning to the end of this Prophesy.

CHAP. XXV.

A Digression concerning the 53 ^d Chapter of Isaiah: And the vindication of it from the perverse Interpretation of HUGO GROTIUS.

THis Chapter is well by some termed Carnificina Rabbinorum; a place of Scripture that sets them on the rack; and makes thē turn thenselves all ways possible to escape the torture, which it puts their unbelieving hearts unto. Not long since a worthy and very learned friend told me, that speaking with Manasseh Ben Israel at Amstelredam, and urging this Prophesy unto him, he ingenuously told him, profecto locus iste magnum scandalum dedit; to whom the other replied; Recte, quia Christus vobis lapis scandali est. Hulsius the Hebrew Professor at Breda, professes that some Jews told him, that their Rabbins could easily have extricated themselves from all other places of the Prophets, if Isaiah in this place had but held his peace. Huls. Theolog. Judaic. lib. 1. Part. 2. Dict. Sapp. de Tempor. Messiae. Though I value not their boasting of their extricating themselves from the other Prophesies, knowing that they are no less entangled with that of Daniel, chap. 9. (Of which there is an eminent story in Franzius, de sacrificiis, concerning his dispute with a Learned Jew on that subject:) yet it appears, that by this, they are confessedly intricated beyond all hope of evading, until they divest themselves of their Cursed Hypothesis.

Hence it is that with so much greediness they scraped together all the Copyes of Abrabaniel 's Comment on this Chapter; so that it was very hard for a Christian, a long time to get a sight of it; as Constantine l' Empereur acquaints us in his Preface to his refutation of it: because they thought themselves in some measure instructed by him, to avoid the Arguments of the Christians from hence, by his application of the whole to Josiah: and I must needs say he hath put as good, yea a far better color of probability upon his Interpretation, then he with whom I have to do, hath done on his.

How ungrateful then, & how unacceptable to all Professors of the name of Jesus Christ, must the labors of Grotius needs be; who hath to the uttermost of his power reached out his hand to relieve the poor blind Creatures from their rack and Torture, by applying (though successelesly) this whole Prophesy of Jeremiah, casting himself into the same entanglements with them, not yielding them indeed the least relief, is easily to conjecture. And this is not a little aggravated, in that the Socinians who are no less racked & tortured with this Scripture then the▪ Jews, durst never yet attempt to accommodate the things here spoken of to any other; though they have expressed a desire of so doing; and which if they could compass, they would free themselves from the sharpest sword, that lies at the throat of their cause; Seeing if it is certain, that the things here mentioned may be applied to any other, the satisfaction of Christ cannot from them be confirmed. This Digression then is to cast into the fire that br • ken Crutch, which this Learned man hath lent unto the Jews and Socinians to lean upon, and keep themselves from sinking under their unbelief.

To discover the rise of that Learned Mans opinion, that Jeremiah is intended in this Prophesy, the conceits of the Jewish Doctors may a little be considered, who are divided amongst themselves; The ancient Doctors generally conclude, that it is the Messiah, who is here intended Behold my servant the Messiah shall prosper, says the Chaldee Paraphrast upon the place And Constantius l' Empereur tells from R. Simeon, in his book Salkout, that the Ancient Rabbins, in their ancient Book Tancluma, and higher, were of the same Judgment. Rabbi Moses Alscheth is urged to the same purpose at large by Hulsius. And in his comment on this place he says expressly, Ecce Doctors nostri lauda • ae memory uno ere statuunt, & a majoribus acceperunt, de rege Messia sermonem esse, & doctorun▪ L. M. v • stigiis insistemus. And one passage in him is very admirable in the same place saith he; Dicunt Doctors nostri L▪ M. omnium afflictionum quae mundum ingressae sunt, tertia pars Davidi & Patriarchis obtigit: tertia altera seculo excisionis, ultima tertia pars regi Messiae incumbet. Where he urgeth the common consent of their Doctors for the sufferings of the Messiah. Of the same mind was R▪ Solomon, as he is cited by Pe • rus Galatinus lib. 8. cap. 14. As the same is affirmed by the Misedrach Resh. cap. 2. 14. And in Beresheth Rabba on Gen. 24. as is observed by Raimundus Martin, Pug. fedei 3 ^a p. Dist. 1▪ cap. 10. So that before these men grew impudent and crafty in corrupting and perverting the Testimonies of the Old Testament, conc • rning the Messiah, they generally granted him, and only him to be here intended▪ It was not for want of company then that Grotius took in with the Modern Rabbins, who being mad with envy and malice care not what they say, so they may oppose Jesus▪ Christ.

2. Many of the following Jewish Doctors interpret this place of the whole people of the Jews. And this way go the men, who are of the greatest note amongst them in these latter days; as R. D. Kimchi, Ibn Ezra, Abarbiniel, Lipman, with what weak and mean pretences, with what inconsistency as to the words of the text hath been by others manifested.

3. Abrabinel or Abrabaniel, a man of great note and honor amongst them, though he assent to the former Exposition of applying the whole Prophesy to the People of the Jews, and interprets the words at large accordingly, which exposition is confuted by Constantine l' Empereur, yet he inclines to a singular opinion of his own, that Josiah is the man pointed at, and described: But he is the first and last, that abides by that interpretation.

4. Grotius interprets the words of Jeremiah in the first place▪ not denying them (as we shall see) to have an Acc • mmodation to Christ. In this he hath the Company of one Rabbi; R. Saadias G • on, mentioned by Ibn Ezra upon the 52. Chapt. of this Prophesy v. 13. But this fancy of Saadias is fully confuted by Abarbinel: which words because they sufficiently evert the whole design of Grotius also, I shall transcribe as they lie in the translation of Huls • us. Revera ne unum quidem versiculum video, qui de Jeremiah exponi possit: qua ration de eo dicetur, Extolletur & altus erit valde? Item illud, Propter eum obdent Reges os suum, Nam aetas illa Prophetas habere consueverat. Quomodo etiam dici potest Morbos nostros portasse, & dolores nostros bajulasse, & in tumi • e ejus curationem nobis esse, Deum in ipsum incurrere fecisse peccata omnium nostrûm: quasi ipsi poena incubuisset, & Israel fuisset immunis▪ Jam illud, Propter pec • atum populi mei plaga ipsis, item, Dedit cum improbis sepulcrum ejus, ad ipsum referri nequit; multo minus illud, videbit semen, prolongabit dies, item, Cum robustis partietur spolium. In quibus omnibus nihil est quod de ipso commode affi • mari possit. Unde vehementer mi • or, quomodo R. Hagaon in hanc sententiam perduci potuerit, & Sapientes dari qui hanc expositionem laudant: cum tamen tota ista exponendi ratio plane aliena sit, & e Scriptura non facta.

Now certainly if this Jew thought he had sufficient cause to admire, that any blind Rabbi should thus wrest the sense of the Holy Ghost, and that any wise man should be so foolish as to commend it: We cannot but be excused, in admiring that any man professing himself a Christian, should insist in his steps, and that any should commend him for so doing.

That therefore, which here is affirmed, in the entrance of his Discourse by Abarbinel, namely, that not one verse can, or may be expounded of Jeremiah, shall now particularly be made good against Grotius.

1. He confesseth with us that the Head of this Prophesy and Discourse is in verse. 13. chap. 52. The words of that verse are.

Behold my Servant shall deal prudently: he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high.

Of the sense of which words, thus he.

Ecce intelliget servus meus] Haec omnia clarissime revelata cognoscet Jeremiah. Exaltabitur & elevabitur & subl • mis erit valde.] In magno honor erit apud ipsos Chaldaeos, Ierem. 39. ch. v. 40. My servant Jeremiah shall have all these things clearly revealed to him, and he shall be in great honor with the Chaldeans. So he,

First, for the words themselves: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the vulgar Latin, he renders intelliget, shall understand. The word signifies rather prudence for Action with success, then any speculativ • knowledge by Revelation: 1 Sam. 18. 30. it is used of David behaving himself wisely in the business of his millitary & civil employment. Its opposite saith Pagnin, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ( quod incogitantiam significat in rebus agendis & ignavā levitatem ) which signifies incogitancy in the management of affairs and idle lightness: Whence the word is usually taken for to prosper in affairs, as it used of our Savior Ierem. 23. 5. a King shall reign 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and prosper. Nor can it be otherwise used here, considering the Connection of the words wherein it stands: it being the precedent to his being highly exalted who is spoken of; which rather follows his dealing prudently, then his receiving revelations: So that in the very entrance there is a mistake in the sense of the word, and that mistake lies at the bottom of the whole Interpretation.

2. I deny that God speaks anywhere in the Scripture of any one, besides Jesus Christ in this phrase, without any addition, My Servant, as here; Behold my Servant. So he speaks of Christ, Ch. 42. v. 1, 19. and other places; but not of any other Person whatever. It is an expression 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and not to be applied to any, but to him, who was the Great Servant of the Father, in the Work of Mediation.

3. Even in respect of Revelations, there is no ground, why those made to Jeremiah, should be spoken of so Emphatically, and by way of Eminence above others; seeing he came short of the Prophet, by whom these words are written. Nor can any instance be given of such a prediction used concerning any Prophet whatever, that was to be raised up in the Church of the Jews; but of Christ himself only.

4. The Exposition of the close of these words, he shall be * • xalted and extolled, and be very high: (the great Exaltation of the Lord Jesus Christ in his Kingdom, when he was made a Prince, and a Savior, in a most eminent manner, being set forth in various expressions, no one reaching to the glory of it) is unworthy the Learned Annotator. He shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high; that is, the Chaldeans shall give him victuals, and a reward, Jerem. 40. 5. and after a while, He shall be carried a Prisoner into Egypt, and there knocked on the head: such was the exaltation of the poor Prophet. What resemblance hath all this, to the Exaltation of Jesus Christ, whom the Learned man confesseth to be intended in these words.

The sense then of these words is, Jesus Christ the Messiah, the Servant of the Father, Isa. 42. 1, 19▪ Phil. 2. 7, 8. shall deal p • udently, and prosper in the business of doing his Fathers will, and carrying on the affairs of his own Kingdom, Isa. 9. 7. And be exalted far above all Principalities and Powers, having a name given him above every name, that at the name of Jesus, &c. Phil. 2. 7, 8.

The next verse is.

As many were astonied at thee, his visage was so marred, more then any man, and his form more then the Sons of men.

Of the Accomplishment of this, in and upon the Lord Jesus Christ, there is no difficulty. The Astonishment mentioned is that of Men, at his low, and despicable Condition as to outward appearance; which was such, as that he said of himself, he was a worm and no man, Ps. 22. His Condition was such, & his Visage such, as all that knew anything of him▪ were astonied to the purpose. The marring of his visage and form, as it may point out all the Acts of violence, that were done upon his face, by spitting, buffeting, and the like; so they express his whole despis • d, contemned, persecuted estate, and condition. But let us a • tend to our Annotator.

Modo secunda, modo tertia personâ de Jeremia loquitur, quod frequens Hebraeis: Sicut mul • i miratierant hominem tam egregium tam faede tractari, in carcerem detrudi, deinde in lacum lutosum, ibi{que} & paedore & cibi inopiâ tabescere: Sic contra, rebus mutatis, admirationi erit honos ipsi habitus.

1. To grant the first observation▪ as to the change of Persons in the discourse, the word ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shall be astonied ) here used, signifies not every slight Admiration, by wondering upon any occasion, or that may be a little more then ordinary: but mostly, an Astonishment arising from the contemplation of some • uthfull spectacle. So Levite. 26. 32. I will bring the Land into desolation, and the Enemies which dwell therein, shall be astonied at it; and the word is near twenty times used to the same purpose. This by way of diminution is made, mirati sunt, admirationi erit.

2. This Astonishment of men, is by Grotius referred both to the dejection, and Exalta • ion of Jeremiah, whereof there is nothing in the words. It is the Amazement of en, at the despicable condition of him, that is spoken of, only, that is intended; but without intruding something of his Exaltation, this discourse had wanted all color or pretext.

3. Was it so great a matter in Jerusalem, that a Prophet should be put in Prison, there, where they imprisoned, stoned, tortured, and slew them almost all, one after another, in their several Generations, that it should be thus prophesied of, as a thing that men would, and should be amazed at? Was it any wonder at all in that Citty, whose streets not long before, had run with the blood of innocent men, that a Prophet, should be cast into Prison? Or was this peculiar to Jeremiah to be dealt so withal? Is it any matter of Astonishment to this very day? Was his Honor afterward, such an amazing thing, in that for a little season he was suffered to go at Liberty, and had victuals given him? Was not this, as to the thing it self, common to him with many Hundred others? Were his afflictions such, as to be beyond compare with those of any man, or any of the Sons of men? Or his Honors such, as to dazzle the eyes of men with Admiration and Astonishment? Let a man dare to make bold with the word of God▪ and he may make as many such Applications as he pleaseth, and find out what Person he will, to answer all the Prophecies of the Messiah. This not succeeding, let us try the next verse.

Ita asperget gentes multas] in Hebr▪ sic asperget; ut responde •• illi sicut, quod praecessit. Multo • ex Gentibus ab Idolorum cultu • vertet. Similitudo sumpta ab aspersionibus Legalibus; unde & Chaldae •• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 est • bjurgari. At LXX habent 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . non male, nam mirari est aspergi fulgore alicujus.

For the Exposition of the words.

1. We agree that it is, So he shall sprinkle: an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , relating to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 v. 14. As many were astonied, &c. The great work of Christ, and his exaltation therein, being rendered in opposition to his Humiliation, and Dejection before mentioned: As he was in so mean a condition, that men were astonied at him, so he shall be exalted, in his great work of converting the Nations, to their Admiration.

2. It is granted, that the Expression, he shall sprinkle, is an Allusion to the legal washings, and purifications, which as they were typical of real Sanctification, and Holiness; so from them is the Promise thereof so often expressed in the terms of washing and cleansing, Ezek. 36. 26, 27. the Terme being preserved and used in the New Testament frequently; the Blood of Christ, whereby this work is done, being therefore called the Blood of sprinkling; Eph. 5. 25, 26. Heb. 9. 14. The pouring out of the Spirit by Jesus Christ, for the purifying, and sanctifying of many Nations, not the Jews only, but the Children of God throughout the World, by Faith in his Blood, is that which is here intended. What the use of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Chaldee to this purpose, is, I know not.

3. The LXX have very badly rendered the words, Many Nations shall wonder at him; both as to words & sense. For 1. as the words will not bear it; so 2. they make that the Action of the Nations towards Christ, which is his towards thē; They loose the whole sense of the words, & what they say, falls in with what follows, & is clearly expressed. 3. It is not helped by the Explanation given to it, by the Annotator. The First expression is Metaphorical, which the LXX render by a word proper, remote from the sense intended; which the Annotator explains by another metaphor. By which kind of proceedure, men may lead words and senses whither and which way they please.

4. For the Accommodation of the words to Jeremiah; how did he sprinkle many Nations; so as to answer the type of Legal cleansing? Did he pour out the Spirit upon them? Did he sanctify, and make them holy? Did he purge them from their iniquities? But he turned many amongst the Nations, from the worship of Idols: But who told Grotius so? Where is it written or recorded? He prophesied indeed of the desolation of Idols and Idolaters: Of the Conversion of many; of any among the Heathen by his Preaching, he being not purposely sent to them, what evidence have we? If a man may fain what he please, and affix it to whom he please, he may make whom he will to be foretold in any Prophesy.

Kings shall shut their mouth at him.] Reges, ut Nebuchodonosor Chaldaeorum, & Nechos Aegyptiorum, eorum{que} Satrapae admirabuntur cum silentio, ubi videbunt omnia, quae dixit Jeremiah ad amussim & suis temporibus impleta.

That by this Expression, Wonder and Amazement is intended, is agreed: As men, all sorts of men before were astonied at his low condition; so even the greatest of them shall be Astonied at the prosperity of his work and Exaltation. The Reason of this their shutting their mouths in silence and Admiration, is, from the work which he shall do; that is, he shall sprinkle many Nations; as is evident from the following reason assigned: for that which hath not been told them, shall they see; which expresseth the Means whereby he should sprinkle many Nations, even by the Preaching of the Gospel to their Conversion.

For the Application hereof to Jeremiah. 1. That the Kings mentioned did so become silent with Admiration at him and Astonishment, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : and all these magnificent thoughts of the Chaldeans dealing with Jeremiah, is built only on this; that looking on him, as a man that had dissuaded the Jews from their Rebellion against them, and rebuked all their wickedness, and foretold their ruin, they gave him his Life, and Liberty. 2. The Reason assigned by Grotius, why they should so admire him, is for his predictions: but the Reason of the great Amazement and Astonishment at him, in the Text, is his sprinkling of many Nations: so that nothing, not a word, or expression doth here agree to him. Yea this Gloss is directly contrary to the letter of the Text.

The close of these words is; That which had not been told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard, shall they consider. Of which he says; They shall see that come to pass, foreseen and foretold by him, which they not heard of by their Astrologers or Magicians.

1. But what is it, that is here intended? The desolation of Jerusalem: That was it which Jeremiah foretold; upon the account whereof he had that respect with the Chaldees, which through the mercy of God he obtained. Is this that which is thus emphatically expressed; That which they had not heard, that which they had not been told, this they should see, this they should consider. That this is directly spoken of Jesus Christ, that he is the thing which they had not seen, or heard of, the Apostle tells us, Rom. 15. 21. Strange that this should be the desolation of Iersalem. 2. It is probable that the Magicians and Astrologers, whose life and trade it was to flatter their Kings with hope of success in their Wars, and undertaking, had foretold the taking of Jerusalem, considering that the King of the Chaldees, had used all manner of divinations, before he undertook the war against it. It is too much trouble to abide on such vain imaginations. Nor doth Grotius take any care to evidence, how that which he delivers as the sense of the words, may so much as be typically spoken of Jesus Christ, or be any way accommodated to him.

The Prophet proceeds Chap. 53. with the same continued discourse. Who hath believed our report; and to whom is the Arm of the Lord revealed? which words are thus illustrated by the Annotator.

Vultis scire, inquit, quis ill sit futurus de quo caepi agere, qui & meis prophetiis plenam habebit fidem, & ipse ae maximis rebus, quas potentia Dei peraget, revelationes accipiet exactissimas, omnibus circumstantiis additis: Dabo vobis geminas ejus notas, unde cognosci possit: Hae notae in Ieremiam quidem congruunt prius, sed potius in Christum

I suppose i • we had not the Advantage of receiving quite another Interpretation of these words, from the Holy Ghost himself in the New Testament, yet it would not have been easy for any to have swallowed this Gloss, that is as little allied to the Text, as anything that can possibly be imagined. The Holy Ghost tells us, that these words are the complaint of the Prophet, and the Church of Believers unto God, concerning the paucity of them that would believe in Christ, or did so believe, when he was exhibited in the flesh: the power of the Lord with him for our Salvation, being effectually revealed to very few of the Jews: so John. 12. 37, 38. But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him, that the saying of Isaiah the Prophet might be fulfilled, Lord who hath believed our report, and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? So Rom▪ 10. 16. But they have not obeyed the Gospel; for Isaiah saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

• . Let us now a little compare these several Interpretations: Who hath believe • d our report? Lord how few do believe on Christ, working miracles himself▪ & preached by the Apostles? Jeremiah shall b • lieve my▪ Prophecies, saith Grotius. To whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? To how few is the power of God unto salvation made known by the Holy Ghost? Jeremiah also shall have clear rev • lations, says Grotius. And this is counted Learnedly to interpret the Scriptures; and every day are such Annotations on the Scriptue multiplied.

3. It is not then the Prophets prediction of what he should do, of whom he treats, what he should Believe, what he should Receive, whereof there is notice given in this verse; but what others shall do in reference to the Preaching of him; they shall not believe, Who hath believed?

4. The Annotator tells us, these words do agree to Christ chiefly, and magis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . This then must be the signification of them, according to his Interpretation, in relation unto Christ: He shall believe the Prophesies of Isaiah, and receive revelations of his own. For my part I am rather of the mind of John and Paul, concerning these words, then of the Learned Annotator's▪

5. There is no mention of describing the person spoken of, by two notes: but in the first words the Prophet enters upon the description of Christ, what he was, what he did, and suffered for us, which he pursues to the end of the Chapter.

V. 2. For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a ro •• out of a dry ground; he hath no form nor comeliness, and when we shall see him, there is no beauty, that we should desire him. ] An entrance is made in these words, into the account that the Prophet intends to give, why so few believed in Christ the Messiah, when he came, after they had looked for him, and desired him so long, namely his great unsuitableness to their Expectation; They looked for a Person shining in Honor and Glory, raising a visible pompous terrene Kingdom, whereof they should be made partakers. But Christ, when he comes indeed, grows up both in his human nature, and his Kingdom, as a tender plant, obnoxious to the incursions of Beasts, Winds, and Stormes, and treading on of everyone; yet preserved by the providence of God, under whose eye, and before whom he grew up, he shall prosper; and he shall be as a Root preserved in the dry ground of the parched house of David, and poor Family of Mary and Joseph, every way outwardly contemptible; so that from thence none could look for the Springing of such a branch of the Lord. And whereas they expected that he should appear with a great deal of outward form, Lovelinesse, Beauty, and everything that should make a Glorious Person desirable, when they come to see him, indeed, in his outward condition, they shall not be able to discover anything in the World, for which they should desire him, own him, or receive him. And therefore after they shall have gone forth upon the report that shall go of him, to see him, they shall be offended and return, and say, Is not this the Carpenters son, and are not his Brethren with us? This sword of the Lord, which lies at the Heart of the Jews to this day, the Learned Annotator labors to • ase them of, by accommodating these words to Jeremiah; which through the favor of the Reader, I shall no otherwise refute, then by its repetition: For he shall grow up before the Lord as a tender plant; Jeremiah shall serve God in his Prophetical Office, whilst he is young: And as a root out of a dry ground: He shall be borne at Anathoth, a poor village. He hath no form nor comeliness: He shall be heavy and Sad. And when we see him &c. He shall not have an amiable countenance. Who might not these things be spoken of him that was a Prophet, if the name of Anathoth be left out and some other supplied in the room thereof?

The third verse pursues the description of the Messiah in respect of his abject outward condition, which▪ being of the same import with the former, and it being not my aim to comment on the Text, I shall pass by.

V. 4. Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows: Yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. ] Having formerly given the sense of these words, and vindicated them from the Exceptions of the Socinians, I shall do▪ no more but animadvert upon their accommodation to Jeremiah by Grotius. Thus then he,

Vere languore • nostros ipse tulit.] Ille non talia meritus, mala subiit quae nos eramu • meriti. Haec omnia ait Iudaeos dicturos post captam urbem He that deserved no such thing underwent the evils that we had deserved. All these things he saith the Jews shall say after the taking of the Citty.

It is of the unworthy dealing of the Jews with the Prophet in Jerusalem during the seige, that he supposes these words are spoken, and spoken by the Jews after the taking of the Citty. The sum is, when he was so hardly treated, we deserved it, even to be so dealt withal, not he, who delivered the word of God.

But 1. The words are, he bare our griefs, and carried our sorrows: That by our griefs & sorrows our sins, and the punishment due to them are intended, hath been declared. That the force of the words bearing and carrying do evince, that he took them upon himself, hath also been manifested. That he so took them, as that God made them meet upon him in his Justice, hat likewise been proved. That by his bearing of them we come to have peace, and are freed▪ shall be farther cleared; as it is expressly mentioned, v. 5, 11. Let us now▪ see how this may be accommodated to Jeremiah: Did he undergo the punishment due to the sins of the Jews? Or did they bear their own sins? Did God cause their sins to meet on Him, then when he bare them, or is it not expressly against his Law, that one should bear the sins of another? Were the Jews freed▪ Had they peace by Jeremiah's sufferings? Or rather did they not hasten their utter ruin? If this be to interpret the Scripture, I know not what it is to corrupt it.

2. There is not the least▪ evidence, that the Jews had any such thoughts, or were at all greatly troubled after the taking of the City by the Chaldeans, concerning their dealings with Jeremiah; whom they afterwards accused to his face, of being a false Prophet, and lying to them in the name of the Lord. Neither are these words supposed to be spoken by the Jews, but by the Church of God.

Et nos ex • stimavimus eum percussum (leprosum v. 6.) vulneratum & a Deo humiliatum] Nos credidimus Jeremiam merito conjectum in car • erem & lacū, Deo illum exosum habente, ut hostem Urbis, Templi, & Pseudoprophetam. We believed that Jeremiah w • s deservedly cast into the prison and mire, God hating him as an enemy of the City and Temple, and as a false Prophet. But

1. These words may be thus applied to any Prophet whatever, that suffered Persecution & martyrdom from the Jews, as who of thē did not, the one or the other? For they quickly saw their error and mistake as to one, though at the same time they fall upon another; as our Savior upbraideth the Pharisees.

Nor

2. Was this any such great matter, that the Jews should think a true Prophet to be a false Prophet, and therefore deservedly punished, as in the Law was appointed, that it should thus signally be foretold concerning Jeremiah. But that the Son of God, the Son and heir of the Vineyard, should be so dealt withal, this is that the Prophet might well bring in the Church thus signally complaining of. Of him to this day are the thoughts of the Jews no other then as here recorded, which they express by calling him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .

The reason of the low condition of the Messiah, which was so misapprehended of the Jews, i • rendered in the next verse, and their mistake rectifyed.

But he was wounded for our transgress • ons, he was bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we • re h • aled▪

I suppose it▪ will not be questioned, but that these words belong to our Blessed Savior, and that Redemption which he wrought for us by his death and blood. Not only the full accomplishment of the thing it self, as delivered in the New Te •• ament, but the quotation of the words themselves, to that end and purpose 1 Pet. 2. 24. do undeniably evince it. In what sense the words are to be understood of him, we have formerly declared. That in that sense they are applicable to any other will not be pleaded. That they have any other sense is yet to be proved. To this, thus the Annotator.

Ipse autem vulneratus est propter iniquitates nostras] in Hebraeo. At vero ipse vulneratus est (id est, male tractatus est) crimine nostro: in nobis culpa fuit, non in ipso: Sic & quod sequitur, Attritus est per culpam nostrorum: Iniquissima de eo sense • mus & propterea crudeliter eum tractavimus: id nunc rebus ipsis appare • : Similia dixerant Judaei qui se converterunt die Pentecostes: & de • nceps.

But he was wounded for our transgressions ] in the Hebrew, But he was wounded (that is, evilly entreated) by our fault. The fault was in us, not in him: And so that which follows: He was bruised by our fault: we thought ill of him, and therefore handled Him cruelly: This now is evident from the things themselves: The like things said the Jews who converted themselves on the day of Pentecost, and afterwards.

The Reading of the words must first be considered, and then their sense and meaning: For against both these doth the Learned Annotate • transgress, perverting the former, that he might the more easily wr • st the latter. He was wounded for our sins [crimine nostro] by our crime; that is, it was our fault not▪ his, that he was so evilly dealt with. And not to insist on the word, wounded or tormented with pain, which is slightly interpreted by evil-entreated, the question is, whether the efficient, or procuring and meritorious cause o • Christ's wounding be here expressed.

2. The words used to express this cause of wounding are two, and both Emphaticall: the first is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he was wounded 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ for our prevarications, our proud transgressing of the Law▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , est rebellare, & exire a voluntate Domini, vel praecepto, ex superb • a: R. D. in Mich • . It is properly to • ebell against man or God; Against man▪ 2 King. 3. 7. The King of Moab 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath rebelled against me: and Ch 8. v. 20. In his days Edom 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rebelled: as also against God, Isa. 1. • . I have brought up Children, and they 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 have rebelled against me. Nor is i • used in any other sense in the Scripture, but for Pr • varication and Rebellion with an high hand, and through pride: The other word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; He was bruised 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for our iniquities; The word signifies, a declining from the right way, with perversity and frowardness. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , est inique vel perverse agere; proprie curvum esse, vel incurvari; so that all sorts of sins, are here Emphatically and Distinctly expressed, even the greatest Rebellion, and most perverse, crooked turning aside from the ways of God.

3. Their Causality, in reference to the wounding of him here mentioned, is expressed in the Preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 min, which properly is de, ex▪ à, e, from, or for. Now to put an issue to the sense of these words, and thence, in a good measure, to the sense of this place, let the Reader consult the Collections of the use of this Preposition in Pagnine, Buxtorf, Calasius, or any other; when he finds it with sin as here, and relating to punishment, if he find it once to signify anything but the meritorious procuring cause of punishment, the Learned Annotator may yet enjoy his interpretation in quietness. But if this be so? If this Expression do constantly and perpetually denote the impulsive procuring cause of punishment; it was not well done of him, to leave the preposition quite out in the first place, and in the next place so to express it, as to confine it to signify the efficient cause of what is affirmed.

This being then the reading of the words, He was wounded or tormented for our sins: The sense as relating to Jesus Christ, is manifest. When we thought he was Justly for his own sake, as a Seducer, and Malefactor, smitton of God, he was then under the Punishment due to our Iniquities; was so tormented for what we had deserved. This is thus rendered by our Annotator. Jeremiah was not in the fault, who Prophesyed to us, but we, that he was so evilly dealt with: He was bruised for our Iniquities, that is, we thought hard of him, and dealt evilly with him; which may pass with the former.

The LXX render these words: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : Rightly! to be wounded 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is to be wounded for, and not by sin, no otherwise then that also signifies the impulsive cause. And the Chaldee Paraphrast, not able to avoid the clearness of the Expression, denoting the meritorious cause of Punishment, and yet not understanding how the Messiah should be wounded, or punished, he thus rendered the words: Et ipse aedificabit domum Sanctuarii nostri, quod violatum est propter peccata nostra, & traditum est propter iniquitates nostras.

Proceed we to the next words, which are exegetical of these: He was wounded for our sins; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes are we healed. Of these thus the Annotator

Disciplina pacis nostrae super eum] apud eum, id est, monitis, nobis attulit salutaria, si ea reciperemus.

But 1. there is in this sense of the words, nothing Peculiar to Jeremiah; All the rest of the Prophets did so, and were rejected no less then he.

2. The words are not, He gave us good Counsel, if we would have taken it: But, The Chastisement of our Peace was upon him. And what affinity there is between these two Expressions, that the one of them should be used for the Explication of the other, I profess I know not; Peter expounds it by, He bare our sins in his own body on the Tree, 1 Pet. 2. 24.

3. The word rendered by us, Chastisement; by the vulgar Latin • which Grotius follows, disciplina, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Musar; which as it hath its first signification to learn, so it signifies also to correct, because Learn • ng is seldom carried on without correction; and thence disciplina signifies the same. Now what is the Correction of our Peace? Was it the Instruction of Christ, not that he gave, but that he had, that we have our Peace by? The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he renders, apud eum, contrary to the known sense of the word; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to ascend, to lift up, to make to ascend; a word of most frequent use; thence is the word used, rendered super; intimating that the Chastisement of our Peace was made to ascend on him; as Peter expresseth the sense of this place; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : he carried up our sins on his body on the Tree; they were made to ascend on him. The LXX render the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; the Vulgar Latin super eum: And there is not the least color for the Annotators, Apud eum. Now the Chastisement of our Peace, that is, the punishment that was due, that we might have peace, or, whereby we have peace with God, was upon him; is (it seems) He gave us good Counsel and admonition, if we would have followed it.

4. Here is no word expressing any act of the person spoken of, but his suffering or undergoing punishment. But of this enough.

Et livore ejus sanati sumus] Livore ejus, id est, ipsius patientiae, nos sanati fuissemus, id est, liberati ab impendentibus malis, si verbis ipsius, tanta malorum tolerantia confirmatis, habuissemus fidem. Hebraei potentialem modum aliter quàm per indicativum exprimere nequeunt; ideo multa adhibenda attentio ad consequendos sensus.

I cannot but profess, that setting aside some of the monstrous figments of the Jewish Rabbins, I never in my whole life, met with an Interpretation of Scripture, offering more palpable violence to the Words, then this of the Annotator. Doubtless to repeat it, with all Sober men, is sufficient to confute it. I shall briefly add;

1. The Prophet says, we are healed: the Annotator, we might have been healed, but are not.

2. The healing in the Prophet, is by deliverance from sin, mentioned in the words foregoing: and so interpreted by Peter, 1 Ep. 2. 24. whereby we have Peace with God, which we have. The healing in the Annotator, is the deliverance from destruction by the Chaldeans which they were not delivered from, but might have been.

3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chabura, in the Prophet, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Peter; but patience in the Annotator.

4. By his stripes we are healed, is in the Annotator, By hearkening to him we might have been healed; or delivered from the evils threatened, by his stripes; that is, by hearkening to his Counsel, when he endured evils patiently; we are healed, that is, we might have been delivered, but are not.

5. As to the Reason given of this Interpretation, that the Hebrews have no Potentiall Mood, I shall desire to know who compelled the Learned Annotator to suppose himself wiser then the Holy Ghost, 1 Pet. 2. 24. to wrest these words into a Potentiall signification, which he expresseth directly, actually, Indicatively. For a Jew to have done this out of hatred and enmity to the Cross of Christ, had been tolerable: but for a man professing himself a Christian, it is somewhat a strange attempt.

6. To close with this verse; we do not esteem ourselves at all beholding to the Annotator, for allowing an Accommodation of these words to our blessed Savior; affirming, that the Jews, who converted themselves (for so it must be expressed, least any should mistake, and think their Conversion to have been the work of the Spirit, and Grace of God) on the day of Pentecost, used such words, as those that the Jews are feigned to use, in reference to Jeremiah. It is quite of another business that the Prophet is speaking; not of the sin of the Jews in crucifying Christ, but of all our sins, for which he was crucified;

— Munera quidem misit, sed misit in hame.

V. 6. All we like sheep are gone astray, we are turned everyone to his own way, and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Grotius. Erraveramus a Manassis temporibus, alii ad alia idola: Et permisit Deus ut ill nostro gravi crimine indigna pateretur. We have all erred from the days of Manasseh, some following some Idols, others others: And God permitted that he by our grievous crime should suffer most unworthy things.

Though the words of this verse are most important, yet having at large before insisted on the latter words of it, I shall be brief in my Animadversions on the signal depravation of them by the Learned Annotator. Therefore.

1. Why is this Confession of sins restrained to the times of Manasseh? and not afterwards? The expression is universal, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 all of us: and a man to his own way. And if these words may be allowed to respect Jesus Christ at all, they will not bear any such restriction. But this is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of this interpretation; that these are the words of the Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem; which are the words of the converted Jews and Gentiles, after the suffering of Jesus Christ.

2. Why is the sin confessed, restrained to Idolatry? Men's own ways which they walk in, when they turn from the ways of God, and know not the ways of peace, comprehend all their evils of every kind, that their hearts and lives are infected withal.

3. The last words are unworthy a person of much less learning, and Judgment then the Annotatour. For

1. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hiphghiah (of which before) is interpreted without pretence▪ warrant, or color, Permisit God permit • ed. But of that word sufficiently before.

2. By his suffering unworthy things through our fault, he understands not the meritorious cause of his suffering, but the means whereby he suffered; even the unbelief & Cruelty of the Jews, which is most remote from the sense of the place.

3. He mentions here distinctly, the fault of them that speak, and his suffering that is spoken of. Permisit Deus ut ill nostro gravi crimine indigna pateretur: when in the Text the fault of them that speak, is the suffering of him that is spoken of. Our iniquities were laid on him; that is, the punishment due to them.

4. His suffering in the Text is God's act: in the Annotations, the Jews only.

5. There is neither sense nor coherence in this Interpretation of the words. We have all sinned, and followed Idols: and God hath suffered him to be evilly entreated by us: When the whole context evidently gives an account of our deserving, and the ways whereby we are delivered: And therein a reason of the low and abject condition of the Messiah in this world. But of this at large elsewhere.

Vers. 7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his Mouth: he is brought as a Lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her sharers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth.

Oblatus est, quia ipse voluit, & non aperuit os suum] in Hebr. oppressus. & afflictus fuit, & non aperuit os suum. Sensum been expresserunt LXX 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Etiam tunc cum in Carcerem ageretur, & in locum lutosum nihil fecit, dixitve iracunde.

Sicut ovis] initissimum animal.

Et quasi agnus] cum quo ipse Jeremiah se comparat, Cap. 11. v. 18.

He was offered because he would, and he opened not his mouth ] in the Hebrew, he was oppressed and afflicted.

As a Sheep ] a most mild Creature.

And as a Lamb ] wherewith Jeremiah compares himself, Chap. 11. v. 18.

The process of the words is to give an account of the same matter formerly insisted on, concerning ones suffering for the sin of others. That the words are spoken of the Lord Jesus, the Holy Ghost hath long since put it out of question, Act. 8. 32. And though there be some difficulty and variety in the Interpretation of the first words, yet his patient suffering as the lamb of God, typed out by all the Sac •• fices of the Jews, under the punishment due to our sins, shines through the whole.

1. For the words themselves they are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which are variously rend • ed: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 LXX. And he for, or because of affliction. Oblatus est quia ipse voluit. Vulg. Lat. He was offered because he would. Oppressus est & ipse afflictus est. Arias Mont. Exigitur & ipse affligitur, Jun it was exacted, and he was afflicted. Others, It was exacted, and he answ • red, which seems most to agree with the Letter; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometimes written with the point on the right corner of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and then it signifies to approach, to draw nigh; and in the matter of Sacrifice it signifies to offer, because men drew nigh to the Lord in offering. So Amos 5. 25. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Have you made to draw nigh your offerings and Sacrifices? Or have you offered? Thus the Vulg. Lat. read the word, and rendered it Oblatus est, he was offer • d. With the point in the left corner, it is to exact, to require, to afflict, to oppress. To exact and require at the hands of any, is the most common sense of the word. So 2 King. 23. 25. Jehojachim exacted silver and gold of the people of the Land. Thence is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an Exactour, one that requires what is imposed on men Zec. 9. 8. & 10. 4. Being used here in a passive sense, it is, it was exacted, and required of him. that is, the punishment due to our sins was required of Jesus Christ having undertaken to be a sponsor: And so Junius hath supplied the words: Exigitur paena, Punishment was exacted. And this is more proper, then what we read, He was oppressed; though that also be significant of the same thing. How the punishment of our sin was exacted or required of Jeremiah, the Annotatour declares not.

The other word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Naanch; the Vulg. Lat. seems to look to the active use of the word, to answer; and therefore renders it voluit; he would, he willingly submitted to it, or he undertook to do that which was exacted. And much may be said for this interpretation from the use of the word in Scripture • . And then the sense will be, it was exacted of him; or our punishment was required of him, & he undertook it with willingness, & patience: so it denotes the will of Christ in undergoing the penalty due to our sins, which he expresseth Psal. 40. 8. Heb. 10. 6, 7. Take it in the sense wherein it is most commonly used, and it denotes the event of the exacting the penalty of our sins of him: He was afflicted. In what sense this may possibly be applied to Jeremiah, I leave to the Annotatour 's friends to find out.

The next words, He opened not his mouth, he applies unto the Patience of Jeremiah, who did neither speak, nor do anything angrily when he was cast into prison. Of that honor which we owe to all the Saints departed, and in an especial manner to the great builders of the Church of God, the Prophets and Apostles, this is no small part, that we deliver them from under the burden of having that ascribed to them, who are members, which is peculiar to their head. I say then, the perfect submission and patience expressed in these words, was not found in holy Jeremiah, who in his Affliction and trial opened his mouth, and cursed the day wherein he was borne: & when he says that himself was as a Lamb, and as an Ox appointed to the slaughter, in the same place, and at the same time he prays for vengeance on his Adversaries, Ierem. 11. 19. in those words, not denoting his patience, but his being exposed to their cruelty.

V. 8. He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who shall declare his generation? For he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he smitten.

The person speaking is here changed, as is manifest from the closed of the verse, for the transgression of my people; who were the speakers before. These then are the words of God by the Prophet: and they are not without their difficulties, concerning which the Reader may consult Commentatours at large. Grotius thus

De carcere & judicio ablatus est] id est, liberatus tandem: Judicium vocat hoc, quia specie judicii ipsi haec mala imposita fuerunt. Jerem. 32. 3. liberatur autem per Babylonios. Generationem ejus quis enarrabit?] Quis numerare poterit dies vitae ejus? id est, erit valde longaevus. Quia abscissus est de terra viventium] nempe cum actus fuit primum in carcerem, deinde in lacum illum caenosum, & rursum in carcerem.

The sense of these words being a little tried out, their application will be manifest. The first words are not without their difficulty, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from prison say we. The word is from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 prohibere, coercere; to forbid and restrain: and is nowhere used for a prison directly. The LXX have rendered it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in his humility or humiliation, his Judgment or sentence was taken away, referring one of the words to one thing, and another to another. The Vulgar Latin, Angustia: Arias Mountanus, clausura: Junius, per coarctationem: rendering the preposition by, not from. The word is rendered by us, oppression: Psal. 107. 39. it is at the utmost in reference to a Prison, claustrum, a place where any may be • hut up: but may as well be rendered Angustia, with the Vulgar Latin; better coarctation, with Junius, being taken for any kind of st • ait and restraint. And indeed properly our Savior was not cast into a Prison, though he was all night under restaint. If the intendment of the words be about what he was d • livered from under which he was; and not what he was delivered from, that he should not undergo it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and from judgment, there is no difficulty in the word. Only whose judgment it is, that he was taken from, is worth inquiry; whither that of God or man▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he was taken, ublatus est. The Vulgar Latin, he was taken up. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is capere, accipere, fe • re, tollere, a word of very large use, both in a good, and in a bad sense; to be taken up, it will scarcely be found to signify; to be taken away, very often.

Now the sense of these words is, that either Christ was taken away, that is, killed and slain by his pressures, and the pretended judgment that was passed on him, or else that he was delivered from the straights and judgment, that might have come upon him. Although he was so afflicted, yet he was taken away from distress & judgment. Junius would have the former sense: & the exegesis of the word, taken away, by the following words he was cut off from the Land of the Living, seem to require it: In that sense the words are, B • durance, restraint, affliction & judgment, either the Righteous Judgment of God, (as Junius ) or the pretended▪ juridical process of men, he was taken away or slain. If I go off from this sense of the words, of all other apprehensions, I should cleave to that of eternal restraint or condemnation, from which Christ was delivered in his greatest distress, Isa. 50. 7, 8. Heb. 5. 7. Though his Afflictions were g • eat, and his pressures sore, yet he was delivered from eternal restraint and Condemnation; it being not possible that he should be detained of death.

Applying all this to Jeremiah, says Grotius, he was delivered from prison and judgment by the Babylonians That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is delivered, & that he was delivered by the Babylonians frō judgment, after that judgment had passed on him, & sentence been