Henry:

1) 1. A fair invitation given to wicked people, to turn from their
wickedness. Assurance is here given us that, if the wicked will turn, he shall surely live, v. 21, 27. Observe…

(3.) What encouragement a repenting returning sinner has to hope for pardon and life according to this promise. He is conscious to himself that his obedience for the future can never be a valuable compensation for his former disobedience; but he has this to support himself with, that God’s nature, property, and delight, is to have mercy and to forgive, for he has said (v. 23): “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? No, by no means; you never had any cause given you to think so.” It is true God has determined to punish sinners; his justice calls for their punishment, and, pursuant to that, impenitent sinners will lie for ever under his wrath and curse; that is the will of his decree, his consequent will, but it is not his antecedent will, the will of his delight. Though the righteousness of his government requires that sinners die, yet the goodness of his nature objects against it. How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? It is spoken here comparatively; he has not pleasure in the ruin of sinners, for he would rather they should turn from their ways and live; he is better pleased when his mercy is glorified in their salvation than when his justice is glorified in their damnation. Matthew Henry on Eze 18:23.

2) II. Here are four good arguments used to enforce these calls to repentance:—1. It is the only way, and it is a sure way, to prevent the ruin which our sins have a direct tendency to: So iniquity shall not be your ruin, which implies that, if we do not repent, iniquity will be our ruin, here and for ever, but that, if we do, we are safe, we are snatched as brands out of the burning. 2. If we repent not, we certainly perish, and our blood will be upon our own heads. Why will you die, O house of Israel? What an absurd thing it is for you to choose death and damnation rather than life and salvation. Note, The reason why sinners die is because they will die; they will go down the way that leads to death, and not come up to the terms on which life is offered. Herein sinners, especially sinners of the house of Israel, are most unreasonable and act most unaccountably. 3. The God of heaven has no delight in our ruin, but desires our welfare (v. 32): I have no pleasure in the death of him that dies, which implies that he has pleasure in the recovery of those that repent; and this is both an engagement and an encouragement to us to repent. 4. We are made for ever if we repent: Turn yourselves, and live. He that says to us, Repent, thereby says to us, Live, yea, he says to us, Live; so that life and death are here set before us. Matthew Henry on Eze 18:32.

Read the rest of this entry »

[Note: for the first quotation I have retained the original spelling. For the balance, I have modernized the spelling.]

Bullinger:

1) There is very much mention made of wedlocke and mariage in the holy Scriptures both in the olde and new Testament: The which may not be expounded afeer the letter, but by an allegory: least with the Turkes and Mahometists, we fall into shamefull and monstrous absurdities. For spiritual thyngs are figured by corporall matters. Of the spirituall this is the summe: God the father the louer of mankinde, wil saue men by his sonne. This thyng is declared by a parable of wedlocke and mariage. And in the matrimonie there is a contract or making sure, there is a coupling or handfasting of eyther partie, and finally mariage.

In the contracte not only the yong man and the mayde are affiaunced, but also the whole manner of maryage to come is appointed, and an order taken For the lawyers say, that affiancing is a promise of the maryage to come. Thys contracte was made at the beginning of the worlde, where God promised that he wyll deliuer mankind by his sonne, and receiue him into glory. Hereunto appertaine all the promises of Christ, of the remission of sinnes, and of euerlastyng lyfe. Moreouer the duties of the spouse are prescribed. Shee promised to be obedient, and other thyngs. &c. Christ the brydegroom the sonne of God the father, affiaunced to himself all the chosen through his free grace: he promises them his righteousness, all heauenly gifts and eternal lyfe. He taketh upon him moreouer all the infirmities of the bride, and pourgeth her filthines. And the bryde is affianced to hym by fayth, as it is written on Osee, & shee byndeth her selfe wholy to hym: after the whose will and law shee frameth her self wholy. For she is the bodye of a lyuely head. As S. Paule sayth in the. 5. To the Ephes. The bryde leaders be the Prophetes, Patriarkes, Aposltes. So John Baptist in the. 3. of John, calleth hymself the friend of the brydegrome. He addeth [to be the spouse of Christ.] S. Paule. 2. Cor. 11. I haue maryed you to one man a chaste vyrgin. &c. Hereunto the. 16. chapt. of Ezechiell seemeth to appertayne.

And the ioyning together of eyther partie, is made after they be affiaunced, with certaine ceremonies: to wit, by takyng ech other by the hands, and certayne wordes spoken, and there is giuen a token or a ring. &c. Immediately after the beginning, there was a couenant or bond made betwixt God and men, which is oft tymes red to haue been renued, not without ceremonies, certayne wordes and sacrifices, as by Abraham, Moses and others. God byndeth him self to men, and men to hym, and that not without the Sacramentes. And all those thyings, serue to this end: namely that God would be in league with man, and haue men bounded to him, and all his thynges communicated to us. And this mariage, was then most straightly ioyned and made, when the sonne of God had united our flesh into one and the same person with him, and commanded his Apostles to preach unto all, that he will haue a communion with the faythful. Of the which communion are read many thyngs euery where in the Scriptures. And he hath geuen a pledge of fayth & perpetuall amitie, not a ryng of gold, but rather the Sacraments: yea euen the holy ghost, as S. Paul sayth in the. 2. to the Corinth.1. and to the Ephes. the first.

And the mariage shal be solemnized in the resurrection of the dead. The soules verely passs from bodily death, into lyfe euerlastyng: but yet the full restitution and saluation of man is not made perfect, except the body come also. Therfore at the resurrection commeth the mariage of the lambe, tha tis, of Christ our redemer. Henry Bullinger, A Hundred Sermons Vpon the Apocalipse of Iesu Christ (London: Printed by Iohn Daye, dwellying ouer Aldersgate, 1573), 256-257.

Read the rest of this entry »

Thomas Cranmer

Expiation and Propitiation

Sacrifice for Sin:

1) But what sleights and shifts this writer doth use to wind the reader into his error, it is wonder to see, by devising to make two sacrifices of one will; the one by declaration, the other by execution; advice such as was never imagined before of no man, and meet to come out of a fantastical head. But I say precisely, that Christ offered himself never but once, because the scripture so precisely and so many times saith so; and having the same for my warrant, it maketh me the bolder to stand against you, that deny that thing which is so often times repeated in scripture. And where you say, that”there is no scripture whereupon we might conclude that Christ did in this mortal life, but in one particular moment of time, offer himself to the Father:” to what purpose you bring forth this moment of time I cannot tell, for I made no mention thereof, but of the day of his death; and the scripture saith plainly, that as it is ordained for every man to die but once, so Christ was offered but once; and saith further, that sin is not forgiven but by effusion of blood, and therefore if Christ had been offered many times, he should have died many times. And of any other offering of Christ’s body for sin, the scripture speaketh not. For although St Paul to the Philippians speaketh of the humiliation of Christ by his incarnation, and so to worldly miseries and afflictions, even unto death upon the cross; yet he calleth not every humiliation of Christ a sacrifice and oblation for remission of sin, but only his oblation upon Good Friday, which as it was our perfect redemption, so was it our perfect reconciliation, propitiation, and satisfaction for sin. And to what purpose you make here a long process of our sacrifices of obedience unto God’s commandments, I cannot devise. For I declare in my last book, that all our whole obedience unto God’s will and commandments is a sacrifice acceptable to God, but not a sacrifice propitiatory: for that sacrifice Christ only made, and by that his sacrifice all our sacrifices be acceptable to God, and without that none is acceptable to him. Thomas Cranmer, ‘Of the Presenceof Christ,” in Works, 1:86.

2) And here they run headlongs into the foulest and most heinous error that ever was imagined. For if they make every day the same oblation and sacrifice for sin that Christ himself made, and the oblation that he made was his death, and the effusion of his most precious blood upon the cross, for our redemption and price of our sins; then followeth it of necessity, that they every day slay Christ, and shed his blood, and so be they worse than the wicked Jews and Pharisees, which slew him and shed his blood but once. Thomas Cranmer, “Of the Oblation and Sacrifice of Christ,” in Works 1:348.

Read the rest of this entry »

Arthur Dent:

Christ died for all, in the sufficiency of his death, but not in efficacy unto life; for only the elect shall be saved by his death; as it is written,  This is my blood in the new testament, which is given for you, meaning his disciples and chosen children. And, again, Christ, being consecrated, is made  the author of salvation to all that obey him.

Arthur Dent, A Plain Man’s Pathway to Heaven (Belfast, Edinburgh, Glasgow Brighton, 1859), 210.

[Note: This stated form of the formula could be taken as expressive of either the classic or of the revised construction. What is interesting is the apparent representational intention, ‘Christ died for all in this sense.’ It was this apparent intentionality that motivated many to restate the formula, thereby removing any hint representation and intentionality, of Christ dying representatively for all even with regard to the sufficiency of the merit and ransom of Christ. Thus, we now know the formula as “Christ’s death is sufficient for all, but efficient for the elect.” Now the emphasis is purely on the death’s intrinsic sufficiency. What is more, so many modern readers, read the older formula as if it meant to say nothing more than the revised expression seeks to communicate; which is not a lot in actuality.]