Universal Redemption of Mankind, Chapter 7 · Argument 28
Argum. 28th. A natura poenae infernalis poſitivae.
If Chriſt Died not for all (but only the Elect) then Conſcience will not torment the Damned for rejecting Chriſt their Lord-Redeemer, or the fruits of his Redemption: But Conſcience will torment them for ſo rejecting Chriſt and his benefits (and thereby wilfully procuring that deſtruction which elſe they might have avoided) Ergo, &c.
The Argument ſeems to me ſo clear that I need not ſay much in confirmation of any part of it.
1. For the Minor it is generally granted,
1. That the Torment of Hell lieth much in the Horrors and Accuſations of Conſcience.
2. And that this is a right judging, and not an erring Conſcience. It is not melancholy miſtakes that torment poor Souls in Hell (as to think they have ſinned when they have not) but the apprehenſions of real evils in and upon them.
3. Conſcience will never torment men for that which never was in their power to avoid, (directly or indirectly, in it ſelf or in the means) though he had been never ſo willing. Did you ever ſee a rational man wounded in Conſcience for not being an Angel, or not ſeeing God face to face, or not redeeming his own Soul? But it is for wilful ſinning that mens Conſciences ſcourge them. When there was a poſſibility of being ſaved, yea a probability put into our hands, yea a certainty if we would yield to Chriſts conditions; and yet men did negligently and wilfully ſlight all, this will wound them everlaſtingly: This will feed the never-dying Worm, and make them cry out againſt themſelves for ever, O what a fool, what a wilful wicked ſelf-hater was I, that had a price in my hands, but had not a heart to improve it! That had a Redeemer offered me that ſuffered for my ſins, and had not a heart to receive him: That had his blood tendered me for the waſhing of my Soul, and the healing of my Wounds, and had not a will to accept it! That might have had Chriſt, and Pardon, and Adoption, and Salvation, and would not! I thought my pleaſures and profits better than Chriſt and Glory! I choſe dung and droſs before the Crown of Life. How juſtly am I now excluded from that bleſſedneſs, which I ſet ſo light by, and endure that miſery which I wilfully run into. (See more of this in the Third Part of my Book of Reſt, in the aggravations of the Damneds Torments.
But if the damned ſhould then truly know that there was never any poſſibility of their recovery; and that Chriſt never died at all for them; nor was their Redeemer; and that if they could have or had believed, it would not have ſaved them; yea that Chriſt being never given for them, could not conſequently be given to them, and conſequently could not be accepted or received as being not an object caprble of being received; yea that God could not give them pardon and Salvation as purchaſed by that Blood that was never ſhed for them, had they believed never ſo much; will not this take of all the accuſations of conſcience, and turn all their clamors againſt God himſelf? And ſo make Hell thus far to be no Hell? If a great Man come to a poor Priſoner, and ſay, take me for the payer of thy debt, (as having already done it) and thou ſhalt be free, and moreover advanced, but otherwiſe thy impriſonment and puniſhment ſhall be far ſorer] ſuppoſe the Man believes him not, and thereupon is cloſer impriſoned and grievouſly puniſhed: If the offer were real upon a true diſcharge of his debt, the Priſoner will blame himſelf: But if it be certainly known to him that there was no ſuch diſcharge or payment, and that it was offered meerly to increaſe his miſery, becauſe the offerer had ſome foreknowledg that he would not believe him, and that if he had believed him he had been never the better, becauſe no payment was made, would this Man blame himſelf? Or would he not approve of his ow… unbelief, and ſay, why ſhould I have truſted ſuch a one? And would he not have cried out on the offerer as a deceiver, and unjuſt and cruel? Conſider and judg. And thus with the Minor I have alſo confirmed the Major Propoſition. Chriſt told the Jews, If he had not come and ſpoak to them (and done the Works that no Man elſe could do) they had not had Sin (in not believing on him) but now they had no Cloak for their Sin. But if Chriſt had not redeemed Men nor been an object for their Faith, then much more evidently may it be ſaid that they had not had Sin who had not believed in him or taken him as their Redeemer: For defect of an object will more excuſe then defect of evidence. If the Works of God diſcovering his inviſible things, leave Sinners (Heathens, as moſt Exſpoſitors judg) without excuſe; and ſo they had been excuſable but for thoſe works; much more excuſable would unbelievers be, if they had no Redeemer to believe in, whatever proclamations of him were made to the World: And conſequently conſcience would excuſe the damned, and ſo would not torment them, for an excuſing conſcience tormenteth none. But whatever Men may ſay now, I am certain that thoſe miſerable damned Souls will have no ſuch alleviation of their miſery: They ſhall not be able then to ſtop the Mouth of conſcience by all the Arguments againſt their Redemption that now ſeem ſo ſtrong; nor to ſay, what ſhould I vex my ſelf for that which I could never help, if I would; and torment my ſelf or accuſe my ſelf for not accepting a Redeemer that never was given me? Or for not redeeming my own Soul.