2. Scripture Attributes Redemption to the Shedding of Christ's Blood.
blood of Christ, that is, to the obedentia passiva. Answer: But not exclusively! If in passages such as Peter 1:19; Col. 1:14, etc. the obedientia passiva is placed in the foreground, there are also scriptural passages in which the redemption is attributed to the obedentia activa, Rom 5:18-19; Ps. 40:7-9. Neither the former nor the latter passages are to be understood exclusively, then.!°°°) Ill. Through the obedientia passiva, divine righteousness had been completely satisfied. God would be asking too much if
obedire Deo Creatori, pro se igitur activam obedientiam legi praestitit. Eodem modo Sogqinus L. 3. de Christo Servatore, c. 5., ait: Christum ut verum hominem iure creationis pro seipso debuisse Deo obedientiam vitae totius plenam, quapropter illa nihil nobis promeruisse. Respondeo: 1, Filius hominis est Dominus Sabbathi, Matt. 12, 8, et sic etiam totius legis. 2. Si Christus esset yids av3panos, obstrictus fuisset legi, iam vero in unitate personae est verus Deus, proinde sui ratione non fuit legi obstrictus. p@tov wevddc huius argumenti, adeoque erroris huius universi consistit in eo, quod actiones et passiones Christi considerantur, ac si essent tantum naturae humanae actiones et passiopes; atqui persona est, quae agit et patitur. Obedientia Christi non est naturae tantum humanae actio, sed Christi ‘Seav9panov, qui ut nobis natus et datus, Es. 9, 9, ita et pro nobis sub lege factus, Gal. 4, 4.. [Google
et effusioni sanguinis Christi redemptionis opus tribuatur, id tamen haudquaquam exclusive accipiendum, ac si sancta Christi vita ab opere redemptionis per hoc excludatur; sed ideo illud fieri existimandum, quia nusquam illuxit clarius, quod nos dilexit ac redemit Dominus, quam in ipsius passione, morte ac vulneribus, ut loquuntur pii veteres; et quia mors Christi est velut ultima linea ac complementum, téhoc, finis et perfectio, totius obedientia, sicut apostolus inquit Phil. 2, 8. Quid? Quod plane adbvatov est, activam obedientiam a passiva in hoc merito separare.— Quenstedt (II, 351 sq.): Agendo culpam, quam homo iniuste commiserat, expiavit, et patiendo poenam, quam homo iuste perpessurus erat, Christus sustulit.... Quia enim non tantum ab ira Dei, iusti iudicis, liberandus erat homo, sed et, ut coram Deo posset consistere, iustitia ei opus erat, quam, nisi impleta lege, consequi non poterat: ideo Christus utrumque in se suscepit et non tantum passus est pro nobis, sed et legi in omnibus satisfecit, ut haec ipsius impletio et obedientia in iustitiam nobis imputaretur.. [Google he not only let Christ pay the penalty for the transgression of the law, but also demanded a positive fulfillment of the law. Lex obligat vel ad obedientiam vel ad poenam [The law obliges either to obedience or to punishment]. Answer: This objection, which seeks to deal with the matter rationally, in contrast to the relevant scriptural statements, does not even do justice to human reason. Even under human law, suffering the punishment for breaking the law is not yet a fulfilment of the law, not conformitas cum lege. A thief who has suffered the legal punishment for his theft is not yet a man who has kept the law, that is, has not stolen. Much less is bearing the punishment for violating the divine law a fulfillment of the law before God. Who will say of the damned in hell who suffer the punishment for their transgression of the law that they thereby fulfill the law of God, the sum total of which is: to love God with all one's heart and to love one's neighbor as oneself? The sentence: "Lex obligat vel ad obedientiam vel ad poenam [The law obliges either to obedience or to punishment’’] is appropriate when it is necessary to remind that no man can make obedience to the law go unpunished, that is, when no transgression of the law that has already taken place can be considered. But if it is necessary to explain what the law requires of fallen man, then it must be said: Lex obligat et ad poenam et ad obedientiam. [The law obliges both to punishment and to obedience]!°°