An answer to the discourse of Mr. William Sherlock, touching the knowledge of Christ,…

God (according to the Dr.) is so naturally just,¹ that he could not pardon without Satisfaction; That is, saith the Author, he is so just, that he hath not one dram of Goodness in him, till is Vengeance be satisfied, which is a glorious kind of Justice.

1. 1Mr. Sherlock.

What! not a dram of Goodness?¹ How then did he send his Son into the World? Was there not a dram in that ⟨p. 80⟩Act immense Love? Or did not that precede Satisfaction? Both are undeniable: If God's being so naturally just, as not to pardon without Satisfaction, argue that there is not a dram of Goodness in him before Satisfaction, what doth his being decretively so just? In this latter he might have waved such a Decree, but he would not; neither doth he pardon any man without a Satisfaction.

1. 1Answer.

Justice being satisfied, ¹a comfortable Scene appears; now God embraces sinners, and accounts them perfectly innocent in Christ's Satisfaction: But this is not enough, the Law must be fulfilled, as well as his Justice satisfied; we must be righteous as well as innocent; otherwise we may escape punishment, but can expect no reward: (though, I confess, I should have thought, that Christ had satisfied for sins of omission together with sins of commission: And as by his satisfaction for doing what we ought not to do, we are reputed by God, as having never done any thing amiss; so by his Satisfaction for our neglecting what we ought to have done, we might by the same reason be reputed by God perfectly righteous, to have done all that we ought, to have kept the whole Law; but it seems this was not sufficient)[…]