De Moor on God's Essential Vindicatory Righteousness: The Satisfaction of Christ, Part 3


Faustus Socinus

But those reasons that Socinus and those that follow his camp suggest certainly are not such: namely, confirmation of the doctrine preached by Him, an exhibition of an example of love and patience to be imitated by us, experience of the evils in which He would succour us, and finally the acquisition of the highest and royal dignity: see part I de Servatore, chapter II and following. Especially since He had abundantly confirmed His doctrine by His holiness of life and many unparalleled miracles accomplished by His own power and publicly. He had given to us an example worthy of imitation in His most holy life, with innumerable testimonies of love and patience at the same time produced, and many examples of martyrdom are at hand, comparing Acts 7:52; etc. The experience of evils, in which He would succour us, had still not profited our High Priest much, unless at the same time He had offered Himself as an expiatory victim for us: for, without this Divine Justice was preventing Him from succouring us unto salvation, as we prove throughout the entire Disputation. And, finally, it was not necessary to lay out for Him a way to consummate and royal dignity through sufferings, who from eternity possessed divine Glory equal with the Father. It does not even appear to suffice, that, if we should say with those that fight for a hypothetical Necessity for Satisfaction, God was able thus to decide according to His Liberty; and thus to have decided actually, because this method of the reconciliation of sinners with God was the most appropriate for it and of all the choices was especially making for the illustration of Divine Justice. For, with the Love of the Father for the Son set in opposition to all these reasons, and with the simple possibility of remission without Satisfaction antecedent to the Decree supposed; I do not doubt that in the hands of all just judges of things this Love would prevail both over Divine Liberty, which in its exercise was not able to cause a diminishment of the natural inclination of the Father toward the Only-begotten Son: and also over a greater demonstration of Justice, since to this particularly is able to be opposed the glory of Omnipotence, more to be preached against in absolute pardon; and also God had been able to reveal His Righteousness in another manner, for example, in temporal punishment either here or in hell or infernal limbo (if it be allowed) to be endured by the very Elect, although not so evidently. Apart from the fact that those acknowledging the Propriety of Satisfaction for Sin before the Decree in God appear only not to support with us its Necessity; as we are yet going to see below, Lord willing.

ABOUT US

Dr. Steven Dilday holds a BA in Religion and Philosophy from Campbell University, a Master of Arts in Religion from Westminster Theological Seminary (Philadelphia), and both a Master of Divinity and a  Ph.D. in Puritan History and Literature from Whitefield Theological Seminary.  He is also the translator of Matthew Poole's Synopsis of Biblical Interpreters and Bernardinus De Moor’s Didactico-Elenctic Theology.

ADDRESS

540-718-2554

 

426 Patterson St.

Central, SC  29630

 

dildaysc@aol.com

SUBSCRIBE FOR EMAILS

© 2020 by FROM REFORMATION TO REFORMATION MINISTRIES.