together new and unknown in the schools of divines. Certainly, our modefty forbids us to difpute against that right of God, whereby he punishes the fins of parents in their children, and Foiterity, which he himself, fuch is his clemency, ufually confines to the third and fourth generation of those that hate him. Nor is it lawful for us to deny, that the feverity of God's anger may at times burn to a farther degree, if the fins are above measure atrocious; and pofterity fhall, for a long feries, not only equal, but even exceed their ancestors in wickedness. God was pleased to give us an example of this in the wicked Jews, according to that threatening prophefy of Chrift, Mat. xxiii. 35. Luke xi. 50. "So that from this inftance his wrath might be seen, burning from the beginning of the world against hypocrites, enemies of righteoufnefs, and murderers;" as the learned perfon very well fpeaks elsewhere. But, that "all the fins of all men are punished in some one perfon or people,” I do not remember, that I ever read or heard till now: neither that "the wicked bear the fins of the faithful." I know that, when God, in pathetic language, Ifa. xliii. 3, 4. commends his love ⚫ towards Ifrael, he declares, that he gave the Egyptians, Ethiopians, and Sabeans for their ranfom, and other men and people for their life. But, as our Calvin judiciously obferves, the prophet borrowed that way of fpeaking from the common method of men, as if he had faid, "the Egyptians, Ethiopians and Sabeans, have been substituted for thee, and, as it were, by way of exchange, forced to undergo that destruction, which was hanging over thee; for that I might fave thee, I have deftroyed them; and turned against them the power of the enemy, that was ready to fall upon thee." Or, to return to the learned perfon's own words: "the meaning of that paffage is; fuch is my efteem for thee, that I am to bring to nought the greatest and most flourishing empires of the world, in order to relieve and comfort thee." This certainly, is quite different from bearing the fins of the faithful, as was typically done by the goat.

LXIX. It is with joy we learn from Paul, that the time will come, when all Ifrael fhall be faved, after the fulness of the -Gentiles is come in. But we think, this cannot be inferred from thefe words, "the fcape-goat fhall be presented alive before Jehovah, to make an atonement with it. The learned perfons themselves teach us that by fometimes fignifies an inftrument, as Gen. xxvii. 40. Deut. xiii. 3. And why not here? That the meaning fhould be, to make an atonement with or by it. We fhall presently fhew how this is done by the live-goat.

LXX. Others therefore, and, if I can form any judgment, to better purpose, affirm, that this fcape-goat, no less than that

which was killed, was a type of Chrift. But these again run into different fentiments. Some maintain, that here are reprefented the two natures of Chrift, the human, to be exposed to mifery and torment; the other the divine, as being impaffible, to remain free and to live for ever; which Cornelius a Lapide relates, was the opinion of Theodoret, Ifychius and Cyril. Others fay, that the twofold ftate of Chrift, before and after his refurrection, was here fet forth. Thus the flain goat was the type of Chrift, lifted upon the crofs, but that fent away alive, of the fame Chrift, raised from the dead, and living for evermore. Of this opinion, after Auguftin and Procopius, were Bochart and other celebrated divines. Yet two things feem very much to oppofe this fentiment: ft, That the fins of Ifrael were laid upon the live-goat: but Chrift rofe from the dead, and entered into glory without fin, Heb. ix. 28. 2dly, That the fame goat, as loaded with fin, was accounted unclean, fo that the person who conveyed it into the wilderness, stood in need of cleansing, ver. 26. But no uncleannefs can so much as be conceived to be in Chrift after his refurrection.

:

LXXI. Others therefore, to whom I readily yield, imagine that a twofold relation of Chrift the mediator is fignified; the one to God the judge, to whom fatisfaction was to be made by the merit of his death; the other, to the devil his enemy, with whom he was to encounter by the efficacy of his life. With refpect to the former, the goat to be flain, fell to God in the latter refpect, the live-goat fell to Azazel. Let us add, that, in the flain goat, a true expiation of fin was represented, which is performed by fhedding of blood and undergoing punishment: but in the other, the effect of this expiation; namely, the removing and taking away of fin, by the bearing it away fo far as never to come into the fight of God against us. And this feems to be the reason of the order, why, after flaying the former goat, fins were laid on the other, to be carried a great way off. Because there could be no taking away of fin without fhedding of blood. Both indeed was done in the ordinary facrifices: but, because the latter was not fo evident in the other facrifices, God was pleased to fet it forth by a peculiar fymbol in this folemn feftival, for the greater confolation of his people. And thus the riches of the divine goodnefs and wifdom manifeftly appear, when he laid before the eyes of his people, by different types, all the relations of Christ the Redeemer, which could not be distinctly exhibited in one fingle piece or picture.

LXXII. But let us more particularly illuftrate the analogy. ift, The fins of Ifrael were laid on this goat that he might bear them. Chrift truly bears, and by bearing takes away the fins

Ff 2

of

of the whole world. And as Aaron laid both his hands on the head of the goat, fo the hand of God lay very heavy and grievous on our furety. 2dly, This goat was appointed by lot for Azazel: not that this brute creature, which was confecrated to God, might be offered to the evil fpirit, but exposed to be tormented by the devil, who very much refides in folitary places, Mat. xii. 43. Now the first promise fhews, that Christ alfo, by the divine will, was to be given up to the Serpent who deceived Eve, Gen. iii. 15. "Thou shalt bruise his heel." And Chrift himself fays, John xiv. 30, 31. " the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me, but that the world may know, that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even fo I do." That is, "the devil indeed has no right " in me, who am, and as I am, perfectly holy, nor can he ever "prevail against me: yet he is come out to combat with me, "to vex and even to flay me, because I have interpofed in the "room of those who deferve death. But I go cheerfully to "meet him; to the end, my obedience and love to my Father,

may appear to all the world.” 3dly, The goat was to be fent to a wilderness, and a land not inhabited: and fuch was the whole world, fuch, above all, was Judea, when Chrift came to fuffer there. Scarce any harveft of faith, truth, and piety, was to be found there; nothing but unfruitfulness, every where the thistle and prickly thorn arofe. And why may we not apply to this, what Matthew relates concerning Chrift, when he was carried by the Spirit into the wildernefs, there to be tempted by the devil? Mat. iv. 1. For the wilderness, into which the goat was driven, could not lefs typify the wilderness in which Christ was tempted, than the wood on which the ferpent was raised, typified the wood on which Christ was lifted up. 4thly, The hand of a fit man, by which the goat was fent away (which, by a conftant tradition of the Jews, might be done as well by a stranger as by an Ifraelite) seems to denote the power of thofe, who rofe up against Chrift, namely, the Gentiles and people of Ifrael, Acts iv. 27. and above all, Pilate, who had caufed Chrift to be carried without the gate, loaded with the cross, the fymbol of a curfe, when he was to encounter with the devil for the last time.

LXIII. I acknowledge I have learned these things, partly from Turretin, partly from Cocceius himself; the former explains

* Turretin concludes § 5. with thefe words. But, as I formerly faid, it seems to be more fimple, that the two goats fignify nothing, but the perfect expiation, which Chrift made, who not only bore our fins in his death, but took them away by his refurrection; not only fatisfied by the offering of himself, but demonftrated

plains this opinion in a large difcourfe, and with cogency and fuccefs defends the argument deduced from it, for the fatisfaction of Christ against the Socinians, de Verit. fatisfact. Christi, P. 3. § 22, 23. But the words of the latter in Comment. ad Heb. c. 9. § 25, feq. as far at leaft as they are to our purpose, very well deserve to be inserted here. He fays, "it is evident "from Ezek. xx. 351 That Chrift was to come to Ifrael, when "Ifrael was, as it were, in the wilderness, but that was, when "Judea was a Roman province, and had a Roman governor: "for then it was a part of the wilderness of the people. And it is "plain enough, that by the dragon, Rev. xii. is reprefented the "Roman people. He made himself ready to devour Chrift, as foon as he was born. Moreover, the first promife declares, "Gen. iii. 17. That Chrift was to be given up into the hands of "the devil, who deceived Eve, under the appearance of a fer66 pent. The Jews afcribe this to Sammael. As therefore the "flaying of the one goat represents the death of Christ, and "the fheding of his blood: fo the fending away of the other goat "into a place uncultivated and defart, denotes, the delivering of "Chrift into the hands of the devil, who has the power of death; " in order to vex and difquiet him; and that by the hands of finners, and of fuch men, to whom the land was fubject, like "the reft of the wilderness of the people, and a part thereof. "That this was done by the appointment and will of God, Chrift himself declares, John xiv. 30, 31. As if he should say, "the prince of this world, who has nothing in me, is come to "exercise his cruelty upon me; which will happen, to the end,

་་

my obedience may appear to the world. We have therefore "a figure of a twofold delivering up of Chrift. First, Of that "by which he delivered up himself as prieft. Secondly, Of "that, by which he was given up into the hands of finners, or "the Gentiles." Thus far Cocceius. To the like purpose, the very learned Momma Oeconom. Temp. t. 1. lib. 2. c. II. $36. feq. Where, after explaining the fame opinion with neatnefs and elegance, and proving it from Scripture, he then fubjoins: we might reft contented with these things, and proceed to others. Let therefore none be offended, that being fatisfied with these things, which exhibit a doctrine found and certain, I pass over other things, in which I find neither that foundness, nor that certainty.

LXXIV.

the perfection and truth of his fatisfaction by his discharge, whereby we are affured, that our fins, being tranflated from us and laid upon him, are carried away, fo that there is now no condemnation to them who are in Chrift Jefus, Rom. viii. I. and that of Paul is fulfilled; that he was delivered for our offences and raised again for our juftification, Rom. iv. 25.

LXXIV. Very lately were published the Varia Sacra of the very famous John Vander Waeyen, in which are two differtations concerning the goat Azazel; the former of which is principally levelled at me. But I would neither have my reader, nor the illuftrious author ignorant, how much I have profited by the perufal of that differtation. By it I was really brought under a kind of neceffity, to confider more accurately the whole of this fubject. Which I have alfo endeavoured to do with a mind fo free from, and divested of all prejudices, as if I had never written any thing on the point before. Nor do I conceal, that from thence I had an opportunity to explain fome things more clearly, others also more diftinctly, and to fet a keener edge on my arguments, than I had done in the former editions of this book. On that account therefore, if he will accept of it, I return him my thanks. But then he must fuffer me to say, that I have not found reafons cogent enough in his differtation to render his opinion more probable, or mine lefs fo. While he opposes my fentiment, and feems to charge it with many inconveniencies, he opposes what Dr Cocceius himself has dexteroufly explained and confirmed by Scripture teftimonies, and as far as I know, never condemned or difapproved; though he fuperadded another opinion. But I could never yet think it probable, that one and the fame ceremony fhould fignify things fo very remote from one another. As for my particular, I leave the entire decifion of this controverfy with the equitable reader; who, if he is not wifer than us both, may profit by our writings. But as to the manner in which. the illuftrious perfon manages the difpute, I imagine, I have very weighty grounds of complaint. Whoever happens to enter the lifts with him, contend indeed on unequal terms. While he thinks, he may fay what he will against others, he gives no quarter to any expreffion of his opponent, if it has but the least appearance of harshness in it; and affuming to himself, what is the prerogative of God alone, canvaffes not only the heart and inmost principles of the thoughts, but alfo boldly pronounces what fentence upon them he thinks proper. Indeed, I fhould appear ridiculous, was I feriously to ward off from myself the grudge conceived against Cocceius, as the origin and the cause of this diffention. Every page in my book fhews my esteem for that. celebrated perfon. And though I cannot affent to him in every particular with an implicit faith, yet I never once dreamed of charging him with herefy: much lefs in this controverfy, where the dispute is not fo much about a doctrinal point, as about the myftical fignification of fome Mofaic inftitutions, without any detriment to our common faith. In which kind of subjects, if