fuch a Law, and appointing fuch a Penalty, and may deter Perfons for the future from the like Offences, even tho' he design to pardon the prefent Offender. In this Cafe, if a Surety be admitted to stand in the room of the Criminal, this is a matter of mere Favour; and fuch a Satisfaction is generally required of him as comes nearest to the Execution of the Penalty threatned by the Law, if any Circumftances fhould render it not proper for him to fuftain the fame in all reIpects. I know not in Hiftory a more happy Example of this than the Cafe of Zaleucus, a Lawgiver of the Locrenfians, who having made a Law that an Adulterer fhould lofe both his Eyes, and finding his own Son guilty of that Crime, he ordered one of his own Eyes to be put out, and one of his Son's. "Thus he render'd to the Law (fays Valeri"us Maximus) the Punishment which it "claim'd, with a moft admirable Tempe"rature of Juftice, dividing himself into a "merciful Father and a juft Lawgiver. The Eye of Zaleucus was here made a partial Sacrifice of Atonement for the Offence of the Criminal; this lofs of his own Eye, together with that of his Son, gave fuch a Satisfaction to the Government, and as effectually fecur'd future Obedience to the Law, as if the Adulterer had loft both his Eyes *.

Such

* I prefume no Reader will be fo weak as to ftrain the Simile to an exact Parallel in all things, and to fup

pofe

Such a fort of Satisfaction is that which the Sufferings and Death of Christ have made to God the Father and Governor of the World, for the Sins of Men. Death was the threatned Penalty for Sin; the Wages of Sin is Death. Tribulation and Anguifb on every Soul that doth amifs: but God in Mercy to the Offender hath not only admitted, but alfo provided a Surety, even his own Son; and he hath accepted of his Agonies of Soul, and his bodily Death, in the room and stead of our Agonies of Soul, and our eternal Death, and regards it as a Satisfaction for the Violation of his Law by our Sins. He is fatisfy'd as a Lawgiver and Governor by this Sacrifice, and upon this account it is properly called a Satisfaction as well as a Sacrifice of Atonement or Propitiation for Sin; fo that God now can honourably pardon the Sinner without any Imputation upon himfelf, either of his own Remiffnefs of Government, or of foolish Pity to the Offender, God having been fatisfy'd with the Honour which Chrift has done to his Law and Government by his Death. Juftice and Mercy

are

pofe that Men are to make half the Satisfaction to the Juftice of God, and Chrift make t'other half, becaufe this Atonement which Zaleucus made was but partial, and did not fave both the Eyes of his Son. The Simile is juft and proper fo far as it goes; but I grant, if Zaleucus had loft both his own Eyes, it would have been a more perfect Parallel.

are temper'd here, and both shine with their peculiar Glories. 'Tis only thro' the Propitiation of Chrift, that God appears to be a juft or righteous God, tho' his Mercy juftifies the Sinner who believes in Jefus, and trufts in this Propitiation. See a further Vindication of the Ufe of the Word Satisfaction in this Controverfy, in the Treatifes of Grotius and of Turretine, and others on that Subject, which I have read in my younger Years.

I have diverted perhaps too far out of the way of Argument which I took; but 'twas needful to give a clear Idea of what is meant by the Atonement of Chrift, that the Pursuit of my Argument in this way of Query, might appear more perfpicuous, and might move onward with greater Force. I have enquir'd of Agrippa already, whether it was poffible that St.Paul, St.Peter, and St.John,by all the various facrifical Phrases which they fo of ten apply to the Death of Christ, can be fuppofed to mean nothing more than a Martyrdom for that Doctrine of his which excites Sinners to Repentance by a Promife of Pardon. I proceed to the next Enquiry.

I'

Query II.TN the fecond Place I would defire Agrippa to tell me, What is the true Intent and Meaning of this fort of facrifical Language, when 'tis used by Jews or Heathens? And why should not the fame Language have the fame Meaning,

when

when 'tis applied to the Death of Christ in the New Teftament? What is the Senfe of fuch Phrases when they are made ufe of by Mofes the Lawgiver of the Jews under God, confidered only as their Political King, and the Civil Governor of that Nation? What is the Meaning of Sin-offerings and Sacrifices of Atonement? What does the Jewish Lawgiver intend, when the People fhall have been guilty of fome Violation of the Statutes of God, as King of the Land, or Neglect of his Ordinances, that they must flay a Lamb or a Goat, and burn it upon the Altar, that the Prieft shall make Atonement for them hereby, and the Offence shall be forgiven them? And even if the Ruler or any of the common People fhould commit a Sin thro' Ignorance against the Commandments of the Lord, they were to lay their Hand upon the Head of the Goat, as a Sin-offering, is not this confeffing fome Iniquity which then came to their knowledge, and transferring it as far as poffible upon the Head of the Animal, and devoting it to Death in their stead? The Sin-offering was to be flain before the Lord; the Prieft was ordained to take the Blood thereof with his Finger, to put it on the Horns of the Altar, and to pour out the rest at the Altar's Foot; the Fat was to be burnt upon the Altar, the Priest was to make Atonement in this manner for the Sin that they had committed, and it fhall be forgiven them. See

Lev. iv.

And in the great Day of Expiation, when an atoning Sacrifice was offered for the whole Nation to remove their annual Guilt, fome of the fame Rites were to be ufed, the Beast was flain and offered to God on the Altar, and the Blood was carried into the most holy Place, and sprinkled before the Prefence of God, that the bleffed God, who dwelt in a visible Glory on the Mercyfeat, might (as it were) fee and accept of the Blood or Life of other Creatures in the room of the Life of the offending Jews. See Levit. iv, v, vi, and xvi.

Thus 'tis evident, that the Defign of these bleeding Sacrifices of Atonement, was to fhew not only that the Criminal deferved Death in the fight of God, according to ftrict and severe Juftice; but that God would fhew Mercy to the Criminal, by sparing him upon his Confeffion of Sin, and his Repentance, and would accept of the vicarious Death of another Creature in his ftead. This was the plain Cafe and evident Defign in the firft Inftitution of Sacrifices given to Adam after his firft Sin, and it runs thro' all the Offerings of Atonement in fucceffive Ages *. I must confefs, faith Paulinus, it has been long my

* See this Matter fet in a good Light by an anonymous Author in the Treatife, intitled, Revelation examined with Candour, Part I. pag. 140, &c. who has promised to fhew how the Death of Chrift was figured in that Covenant with Adam, wherein Sacrifices were inftituted.