Universal Redemption of Mankind, Chapter 7 · Argument 14 – Argument 15
Arg. 14th. Acertitudine fidei, & poſſibilitate rectè credendi.
If Chriſt hath not ſatisfied for the Sins of all, then no Man hath a ſufficient ground for his firſt juſtifying Faith: (All Men are left at an utter uncomfortable uncertainty whether they may believe to Juſtification or not) But the conſequent is falſe: Therefore ſo is the Antecedent.
That which is ſaid before doth ſhew ſo much of the grounds of this Argument, that I ſhall be the ſhorter in it now. All the doubt is of the conſequence of the Major, and to clear that, I ſuppoſe it is granted that all firm, ſufficient Faith for juſtification, muſt not only have a command to warrant it, but alſo a fit object about which it muſt be exerciſed. God commandeth no Man to believe a falſhood to make it become true by believing it, nor to truſt to a perſon or promiſe that is not to be truſted, as being not only fallible, but certainly will deceive. As for the Act of affiance or recumbency, commonly called the juſtifying Act, no Man can groundedly or comfortably reſt on Chriſt for juſtification by his Blood, who doth not firſt know that his Blood was ſhed for him, and hath ſatisfied for him: Elſe he muſt reſt on that which he knows not to be ſufficient for him to reſt upon: For it hath been proved that Chriſts death is not ſufficient to juſtifie any for whom it was not ſuffered, though they ſhould believe. He ſuffered not ſuperfluouſly, as I have ſhewed: Take the confeſſion of a Divine that for fear of Arminianiſm joyned Hands with the Antimonians, Maccovius colleg. diſp. de juſtif. diſp. 5. §. 22. Quoad ſubſtantiam poenae nihil olus perpeſſus eſt Chriſtus quam per legem debebatur: Ne que enim vel Amor Patris, vel etiam juſtitia permittere potuit, plura ut filio imponerentur, quam quae illi neceſſariò tanquam ſponſori ferenda erant; Quoad circumſtantias autem, patientis perſonam, patiendi cauſam, paſſionis efficaciam pluſquam ſufficiens ſatisfactio Chriſti. Neque enim lex requirebat ut Deus moreretur, neque ut ſine peccato proprio quis moreretur, neque morstalis quae ſuffeciſſet pro peccatis totius mundi, ſive pro omnibus & ſingulis hominibus. Here he confeſſeth that Chriſt ſuffered no more than was due by Law, and than was neceſſary for him to ſuffer as Sponſor: And yet that his Death was ſufficient for the Sins of all the World, even for all Men and every Man. And if ſo, then either he ſuffered as Sponſor for all: Or elſe circumſtances did make that Death ſufficient for all, which yet quoad ſubſtantiâ poenae (as he calls it) had none of that which the Law required, and was neceſſary for the Sponſor to undergo. And thus I think (with that added which is ſaid before) it is evident that none have ground to reſt on Chriſts Blood to juſtifie them, or on Chriſt to juſtifie them by his Blood, till they know that his Blood was ſhed for them ſeeing it is ſufficient for no more. But no Man before juſtifying Faith knows that Chriſts Blood was ſhed for him any more then for others that ſhall never be juſtified by it, therefore no Man hath ground thus to believe. And for the intellectual Act of Faith, if it be that which Maccovius ſaith it is ibid. diſput. 3. §. 17. Fides in Chriſtum quae requiritur a nobis ad noſtri juſtificationem eſt, ut credamus pro redemptionem & ſanguinem nos juſtificari & ſalvari, then moſt Men are bound to believe an untruth, if they are bound to believe to juſtification. If it be ſaid that, it … believe that Chriſts Death is ſufficient to pardon him if he believe, I anſwer that no Man can truly believe that neither, but he that firſt knows that he died for him, which none can do but he that knows that he died for all. I marvail how ſuch Divines (as Twiſs and Maccovius who hold the main Antimonian Principles) who ſay that Faith juſtifieth only as we are aſcertained, or receive the knowledg of juſtification already paſt at Chriſts death, can tell how to Salve this. How can they chooſe but ſay, that either God doth not command all where the Goſpel comes to believe to juſtification, or elſe, that he commands moſt Men to believe a falſhood: Or elſe, that all Men are juſtified by Chriſts death.
Let me add here (for I will not make another Argument of it, being built on the ſame grounds with the former) that if Chriſt died not for all, then not only all Men at their firſt invitation, but even all true believers whenever they looſe the fight of their evidences, that is, of their own Faith and other Graces, have no ground left them to renew an Act of juſtifying Faith, nor to caſt their Souls with any confidence on Chriſt: For as long as he knows not himſelf to be Elect and a true believer, he cannot tell whether, Chriſt died for him, and conſequently he knows not whether he may reſt on him as a ſufficient Redeemer, as not knowing whether he ſatisfied for him or not. If any ſay, he muſt believe that he may know, I anſwer 1. It muſt be a revealed truth before it is believed. 2. Believing will not make it true, if it were not true before. We are not to believe that Chriſt may die for us, but to believe that he did die for us. Hear Maccovius his confeſſion of that alſo, Ibid diſp. 9. §. 16. At toto caelo errat Haereticus (Socinus) Neque enim fidem requiri ad hoc dicimus, ut pro nobis ſatisfiat; ſed ut pro fidem ſatisfactio iſta Chriſti quae perac to eſt ante fidem nobis innoteſcat (ſo that when God commandeth Men to believe, he commandeth them to take knowledg of Chriſts ſatisfaction for them before made: And ſurely men cannot know that which is not true, unleſs it be to know it to be falſe.) And thus it ſeems plain to me that many, if not moſt true believers will be left without any ſufficient ground to believe, through a great part of their lives. For I think, aſſurance is not ſo common a thing as ſome imagine, nor ſo conſtant with them that have it: Though Maccovius ſaith (as one Error draws on another.) Ibid. diſp. 9. §. 11. Reſpondeo, (ſalvo aliorum judicio) negando ſenſum illum (qui in nobis oritur ex agnitione noſtrae Iuſtificationis) aliquando tolli penitus in homine: Our Divines that teach poor Souls to uſe their Faith of Adherence when they want evidence, do go another way to work; and ſuppoſe an Univerſal promiſe and before that an Univerſal ſatisfaction: Or elſe Adherence without evidence hath no ſufficient object or ground, and then farewel the Chriſtians moſt conſtant ſtay.
Arg. 15. Ab ordine credendi perverſo.
If Chriſt ſatisfied not for all, then the knowledg or aſſurance that we have juſtifying Faith muſt go before juſtifying Faith: But that is impoſſible as being a contradiction, Ergo, &c.
The reaſon of the conſequence is plain in what was ſaid on the laſt argument. For no Man can believe to juſtification, but by believing that Chriſt is a ſufficient Redeemer, and hath made ſufficient ſatisfaction for his Sins, and by accepting him as offered to apply the fruits of that ſatisfaction to us, and by reſting on him for thoſe fruits. Now all this hath no ground till a Man knows that Chriſt hath already died and ſatisfied for him: And that cannot be known (if Chriſt died not for all) till Men firſt know themſelves to be Elect and believers, and that cannot be known till after we do believe; For if the thing to be believed is that Chriſt died for believers, and for me if I believe, I muſt know that I believe before I can know that he died for me, and yet I muſt know that he hath died and ſatisfied for me before I can believe to Juſtification. See what contradictions are here, and how Men are put upon impoſſibilities, I know the neceſſity of believing that Chriſt hath ſatisfied for me, is denied but I have proved it before.