Universal Redemption of Mankind, Chapter 7 · Argument 30

Universal Redemption of Mankind · Chapter 7 · Argument 30

p. 263Arg. 30. A Comparatione doctrinae univerſalem ſatisfactionem affirmantis cum doctrin… eandem negante.

If they who aſſert Univerſal Redemption (quoad ſatisfactionem & pretium) have all theſe forementioned p. 264Arguments from Scripture for their cauſe, and a multitude of expreſs Texts, and no one ill conſequence following their doctrine, nor one ſound Reaſon, nor one text of Scripture againſt them; And if the deniers of Univerſal Satisfaction have all the contrary diſadvantages; then they that affirm Univerſal Satisfaction are in the right, and they that deny it do err. But the antecedent is true, Ergo. &c.

Here I will 1. Look over theſe Arguments again, and from thence ſhew you the face of the conſequents of the denial of Univerſal Satisfaction.

2. I will lay you down together the expreſs Texts that are for Univerſal Satisfaction.

3. And alſo the Texts that are brought againſt it.

4. And then the particular ſearch of thoſe texts on both ſides, and the anſwer to all the Arguments that are uſually brought againſt Univerſal Satisfaction, I intend ſhall follow afterward in their own places more fully.

The Doctrine which denyeth Univerſal Satisfaction hath all theſe inconveniences, and abſurd conſequents, following, therefore it is not of God, nor true.

1. It either denieth the Univerſal Promiſe or Conditional Gift of Pardon and Life to all men if they will believe, and then it overturneth the ſubſtance of Chriſts Law and Goſpel promiſe: or elſe it maketh God to give conditionally to all men a Pardon and Salvation which Chriſt never purchaſed, and without his dying for men.

p. 2652. It maketh God either not to offer the effects of Chriſts ſatisfaction (Pardon and Life) to all, but only to the Elect: or elſe to offer that which is not, and which he cannot give.

3. It denieth the direct object of Faith, and of Gods offer, that is Chriſtum qui ſatisfecit, [a Chriſt that hath ſatisfied.]

4. It either denieth the Non-Elects deliverance from that flat neceſſity of periſhing, which came on man for ſinning againſt the firſt Law, by its remedileſs unſuſpended obligation, (and ſo neither, Chriſt, Goſpel or Mercy, had ever any nature of a remedy to them, nor any more done toward their deliverance then towards the deliverance of the Devils:) Or elſe it maketh this deliverance and remedy to be without ſatisfaction by Chriſt for them.

5. It either denieth that God commandeth all to believe (but only the Elect: Or elſe maketh God to aſſign them a deceiving Object for their Faith, commanding them to believe in that which never was, and to truſt that which would deceive them if they did truſt it.

6. It maketh God, either to have appointed and commanded the Non-Elect to uſe no means at all for their Recovery and Salvation, or elſe to have appointed them means which are all utterly uſeleſs and inſufficient for want of a prerequiſite cauſe without them, yea which imply a contradiction.

7. It maketh the True and Righteous God to make promiſes of Pardon and Salvation to all men on condition of believing, which he neither would nor could perform (for want of ſuch p. 266ſatisfaction to his Juſtice) if they did believe.

8. It denieth the true ſufficiency of Chriſts Death, for the pardoning and ſaving of all men, if they did believe.

9. It makes the cauſe of mens Damnation to be principally for want of an expiatory Sacrifice and of a Saviour, and not of believing.

10. It maketh Chriſt to have ſuffered much in vain, enduring as much for the ſins of the Elect only, as if the ſins of all men had layen on him.

11. Or elſe it dangerouſly extenuateth and denieth the ſufferings of Chriſt, as if he did not ſuffer as much as was due for the ſins of all and it extenuateth his love, as if he took on him only the ſins of the Elect.

12. It either denieth that any but the Elect ſhould love Chriſt or be thankful to him as their Redeemer (yea or any Elect that have not the knowledg of their Election) and ſo ſhould not repent of the want of this love and thankfulneſs, or elſe that they ſhould love him and be thankful for that which never was true, and never was done for them or given them.

13. It maketh God to have inflicted more on Chriſt then was due, even as much for the Sins of the Elect only, as was due for the Sins of all the World.

14. It leaveth all the World, Elect as well as others, without any ground and object for their firſt juſtifying Faith, and in an utter uncertainty whether they may believe to juſtification or not.

15. It maketh the knowledg that we have juſtifying Faith to go before the having of that Faith.

16. It denieth the moſt neceſſary humbling p. 267aggravation of Mens Sins, ſo that neither the Miniſter can tell wicked Men that they have ſinned againſt him that bought them, nor can any wicked Man ſo accuſe himſelf, no nor any Man that doth not know himſelf to be Elect: They cannot ſay, my Sins put Chriſt to Death, and were the Cauſe of his ſufferings: Nay a Miniſter cannot tell any Man in the World certainly,] thy Sins put Chriſt to death] becauſe he is not certain who is Elect or ſincere in the Faith.

17. It ſubverteth Chriſts new Dominion and Government of the World, and his general legiſlation, and Judgment according to his Law, which is now founded in his Title of Redemption, as the firſt Dominion and Government was on the Title of Creation.

18. It maketh all the benefits that the Non-Elect receive, whether Spiritual or corporal, and ſo even the relaxation of the curſe of the Law (without which relaxation no Man could have ſuch mercies) to befall Men without the ſatisfaction of Chriſt, and ſo either make ſatisfaction, as to all thoſe mercies, needleſs, or elſe muſt find another Satisfier.

19. It maketh the Law of Grace to contain far harder terms then the Law of Works did in its utmoſt rigor.

20. It maketh the Law of Moſes either to bind all the Non-Elect ſtill to all Ceremonies and bondage-ordinances (and ſo ſets up judaiſm) or elſe to be abrogated and taken down, and Men delivered from it, without Chriſts ſuffering for them.

21. It deſtroys almoſt the whole work of the Miniſtry, diſabling Miniſters either to humble p. 268Men by the chiefeſt aggravations of their Sins, and to convince them of ingratitude and unkind dealing with Chriſt, or to ſhew them any hopes to draw them to repentance, or any love and mercy tending to Salvation, to melt and win them to the Love of Chriſt; or any ſufficient object for their Faith and affiance, or any means to be uſed for pardon or Salvation, or any promiſe to encourage them to come in, or any threatening to deter them.

22. It makes God and the Redeemer to have done no more for the remedying of the miſery of moſt of faln mankind, then for the Devils, nor to have put them into any more poſſibility of pardon or Salvation.

23. Nay it makes God to have dealt far hardlier with moſt Men then with the Devils; making them a Law which requireth their believing in one that never died for them, and taking him for their Redeemer that never redeemed them, and that on the meer foreſight that they would not believe it, or decree that they ſhould not; and ſo to create by that Law a neceſſity of their far ſorer puniſhment, without procuring them any poſſibility of avoiding it.

24. It makes the Goſpel of its own Nature to be the greateſt Plague and Judgment to moſt of Men that receive it, that ever God ſendeth to Men on Earth, by binding them over to a greater puniſhment, and aggravating their Sin, without giving them any poſſibility of remedy.

25. It maketh the caſe of all the World except the Elect as deplorate, remedileſs and hopeleſs, as the Caſe of the damned, and ſo denieth them to have any day of Grace, Viſitation or p. 269Salvation, or any price for happineſs put into their Hands.

26. It maketh Chriſt to condemn Men to Hell Fire for not receiving him for their Redeemer that never redeemed them, and for not reſting on him for Salvation by his Blood, which was never ſhed for them, and for not repenting unto life, when they had no hope of mercy, and Faith, and repentance could not have ſaved them.

27. It putteth ſufficient excuſes into the Mouths of the condemned.

28. It maketh the torments of conſcience in Hell to be none at all, and teacheth the damned to put away all their ſorrows and ſelf accuſations.

29. It denieth all the privative part of thoſe torments which Men are obliged to ſuffer by the obligation of Chriſts Law, and ſo maketh Hell either no Hell at all, or next to none.

30. And I ſhall anon ſhew how it leads to Infidelity and other Sins, And after this, what Face of Religion is left, unſubverted? Not that I charge thoſe that deny Univerſal ſatisfaction with holding all theſe abominations, but their Doctrin of introducing them by neceſſary conſequence: It is the opinion and not the Men that I accuſe.

2. Next let me give you ſome expreſs Texts of Scripture, which I ſhall anon run over more fully and vindicate, and ſee which opinion is the truth of God, Joh. 3. 16. God ſo loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoſoever believeth in him, ſhould not periſh, but have everlaſting Life, 2 Pet. 2. 1, 20, 21. But there were falſe Prophets alſo among the People, even p. 270as there ſhall be falſe teachers among you, who privily ſhall bring in damnable Hereſies even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themſelves ſwift destruction, 20. 21. And as Jude hath it. 4. There are certain Men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly Men, turning the Grace of our God into laſciviouſneſs, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, 1 Tim. 2. 5. 6. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and Men, the Man Chriſt Jeſus, who gave himſelf a Ranſom for all, to be testified in due time. 1 Job. 2. 2. He is the Propitiation for our Sins, and not for ours only, but alſo for the Sins of the whole World, Rom. 5. 18. Therefore as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all Men to condemnation, Even ſo by the righteouſneſs of one, the free gift came upon all Men to juſtification of Life, Heb. 2. 9. That he by the Grace of God ſhould taſt Death for every Man, Tit. 2. 11. For the Grace of God that bringeth Salvation, hath appeared to all Men, 1 Tim. 2. 3, 4. Who will have all Men to be ſaved, and to come to the knowledg of the truth, Joh. 3. 17. 18. God ſent not his Son into the World to condemn the World, but that the World through him might be ſaved. He that believeth on him is not condemned, But he that believeth not, is condemned already, becauſe he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the Condemnation, that light is come into the World, and Men loved darkneſs rather then light, becauſe their deeds were evil. 2 Cor. 5. 14, 15. For the love of Chriſt conſtraineth us, becauſe we thus judg, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And that he died for all, that they which live ſhould not henceforth live unto themſelves, p. 271but unto him which died for them, and roſe again. 1 lim. 4. 10. We truſt in the living God, who is the Saviour of all Men, ſpecially of thoſe that believe. Mat. 22. 2, 3, 4. The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a certain King, which made a Marriage for his Son. And ſent forth his Servants to call them that were hidden to the Wedding, and they would not come. And he ſent forth other Servants, ſaying tell them, that are bidden, behold, I have prepared my dinner, my Oxen and Fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: Come unto the Marriage. And verſ. 8. Then ſaid he to his Servants, The Wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Add verſ. 12. 13. So 2 Cor, 5. 18, 19, 20, 21. And all things are of God who hath reconciled us to himſelf by Jeſus Chriſt, and hath given to us the Miniſtry of Reconciliation, to wit, that God was in Chriſt, reconciling the World unto himſelf, not imputing their treſpaſſes unto them, and hath committed unto us the word of Reconciliation. Now then we are Embaſſadors for Chriſt, as though God did heſeech you by us, We pray you in Chriſts ſtead, be reconciled to God. For God made him ſin for us, who knew no ſin, that we might be made the righteouſneſs of God in him. Joh. 4. 42. This is indeed the Christ the Saviour of the World. 1 Joh. 4 14. 15. And we have ſeen and do teſtify that God ſent his Son to be the Saviour of the World: Whoſoever ſhall confeſs that Jeſus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him and he in God, 1 Joh. 5. 9. 10, 11. For this is the Witneſs which he hath teſtified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the Witneſs in himſelf. He that believeth not God, hath made him a Lyar becauſe he believeth not the Record that God gave of his Son. And this is the p. 272Record, that God hath given us Eternal Life, and this Life is in his Son: He that hath the Son, hath Life, and he that hath not the Son hath not Life. Heb. 6. 4, 5. 6. For it is impoſſible for thoſe who were once enlightened, and have taſted of the Heavenly Gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghoſt, and have taſted the good word of God, and the powers of the World to come, if they ſhall fall away, to renew them again to Repentance, ſeeing they crucifie to themſelves the Son of God afreſh, and put him to open ſhame. Heb. 10. 26, 27. 28, 29. For if we ſin willfully after that we have received the knowledg of the Truth, there remaineth no more Sacrifice for ſins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which ſhall devour the Adverſaries. He that deſpiſed Moſes Law, died without mercy, under two or three Witneſſes: Of how much ſorer puniſhment, ſuppoſe ye, ſhall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the Blood of the Govenant wherewith he was ſanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done deſpight unto the Spirit of Grace, Heb. 4. 1. 2. Let us therefore take heed leſt a promiſe being left us of entering into his reſt any of you ſhould ſeem to come ſhort of it. For unto us was the Goſpel preached as well as unto them: But the Goſpel preached did not profit them, not being mixed with Faith in them that heard it. Heb. 2. 3. How ſhall we eſcape if we neglect ſo great Salvation, &c. Joh. 12. 47, 48. And if any▪ man hear my words and believe not, I judg him not: For I came not to judg the World, but to ſave the World. He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words he hath one that judgeth him: The word that I have ſpoken the p. 271ſame ſhall judg him at the laſt day. Luke 13. 39. How oft would I have gathered thy Children together as a Hen gathereth her Brood under her Wings, and ye would not. Behold your Houſe is left unto you deſolate, &c. Mar. 16. 15. Go ye into all the World and Preach the Goſpel to every creature: He that believeth and is baptiſed ſhall be ſaved but he that believeth not, ſhall be damned. Act. 13. 38. 39, 40, 41. Be it known to you therefore Men and Brethren, that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveneſs of Sins: And by him all that believe are juſtified from all things, from which ye could not be juſtified by the Law of Moſes. Beware therefore leaſt that come, &c. Behold ye deſpiſers and wonder, &c. Verſe. 46. Seeing ye have put it from you, and judged your ſelves unworthy of Everlaſting Life, &c. Mar. 18. 27, 32, 34, 35. Then the Lord of that Servant was moved with compaſſion, and looſed him and forgave him the debt, &c. Then his Lord, after that he had called him ſaid unto him, O thou wicked Servant, I forgave thee all that debt, becauſe thou deſiredſt me, ſhouldſt not thou alſo have had compaſſion on thy fellow Servant even as I had pitty on thee; And his Lord was wroth and delivered him to the tormentors, till he ſhould pay all that was due unto him. So likewiſe ſhall my Heavenly Father do alſo unto you if ye from your Hearts forgive not every one his Brother their Treſpaſſes. Joh. 6. 51. I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven: If any Man eat of this Bread he ſhall live for ever: And the Bread that I will give is my Fleſh which I will give for the Life of the World. So verſe 33. 34, 35. Joh. 1. 29. Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the Sin of the World 1 Cor. 15. 21, 22. For as by Man came Death, by Man came alſo the Reſurrection of p. 274the Dead. For as in Adam all die, even ſo in Chriſt ſhall all be made alive. Rom. 14. 15. Deſtroy not him with thy meat, for whom Chriſt died, 1 Cor. 8. 11. And through thy knowledg ſhall thy weak Brother periſh, for whom Chriſt died? Heb. 9. 15. 16. And for this cauſe he is the Mediator of the new Teſtament, that by means of Death, for the Redemption of the transgreſſions under the firſt Teſtament, they which are called might receive the promiſe of Eternal inheritance. For where a Teſtament is, there muſt alſo of neceſſity be the Death of the Teſtator. Col. 1. 20. And having made peace through the Blood of his Croſs by him to reconcile all things unto himſelf by him, whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven. Col. 2. 14. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was againſt us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his Croſs, Act. 3. laſt unto you firſt, God having raiſed up his Son Jeſus, ſent him to bleſs you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. Hoſ. 7. 13. Though I have redeemed them, yet they have ſpoken lies againſt me. Deſtruction to them, &c. Iſa. 53. 6. He laid on him the iniquity of us all, Rom. 14. 9. For to this end Chriſt both died, roſe and revived that he might be Lord both of the Dead and of the living. Iſa. 45. 21, 22. There is no God elſe beſide me, a juſt God and a Saviour, there is none beſide me, look unto me and be ye ſaved all the ends of the Earth, Joh. 1. 7. The ſame came for a Witneſs to bear Witneſs of the Light, that all Men through him might believe, See 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2. to the 13th. John 3. 17. And as Moſes lifted up the Serpent in the Wilderneſs, even ſo muſt the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoſoever believeth in him ſhould not periſh, but have Eternal Life, Rev. 22. 17. Whoſoever p. 275will, let him take the water of Life freely, Col. 2. 28, whom we Preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wiſdom, that we may preſent every man perfect in Chriſt Jeſus, John 5. 22, 23, 26, 27, 28. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son, that all men ſhould honour the Son, even as they honour the Father, &c. For as the Father hath Life in himſelf, ſo hath he given to the Son to have Life in himſelf, and hath given him Authority to execute judgment alſo, becauſe he is the Son of Man. Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming in which all that are in the Graves ſhall hear his voice, and ſhall come forth, they that have done good to the Reſurrection of Life, and they that have done evil to the Reſurrection of Damnation, Acts 3. 22, 23. A Prophet ſhall the Lord your God raiſe up unto you of your Brethren like unto me, him ſhall ye hear in all things whatſoever he ſhall ſay unto you, and it ſhall come to paſs that every Soul that will not hear that Prophet ſhall be deſtroyed from among the People, Luke 20. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. Then ſaid the Lord of the Vineyard what ſhall I do? I will ſend my beloved Son, it may be they will reverence him when they ſee him, &c. The Stone which the Builders rejected is become the head of the Corner, whoſoever ſhall fall upon that ſtone ſhall be broken, but on whomſoever it ſhall fall it will grind him to Powder 1 Cor. 6. 20. And ye are not your own, ye are bought with a Price, therefore glorifie God in your Body and in your Spirit, which are Gods, Deut. 32. 4, 5, 6. They have corrupted themſelves, their ſpot is not the ſpot of his Children, they are a perverſe and crooked Generation, do you thus requite the Lord, O fooliſh People and unwiſe? is not he thy Father that hath bought thee? hath he not p. 274made thee and eſtabliſhed thee? ver. 15. Then he forſook God that made him, and lightly eſteemed the Rock of his Salvation, ſee Pſal. 78. throughout, ver. 35, 36. They remembred that God was their Rock and the high God their Redeemer, nevertheleſs they flattered him with their mouth, and lyed unto him with their tongues, for their heart was not right with him, neither were they ſtedfaſt in his Covenant, but he being full of compaſſion forgave their iniquity, &c. Iſa. 63. 8, 9, 10, He ſaid, ſurely they are my People, Children that will not lye; ſo he was their Saviour, in all their afflictions, he was aff…icted, and the Angel of his preſence ſaved them in his love and in his pity he redeemed them, and he bare them and carried them all the days of old, but they rebelled and vexed his Holy Spirit, wherefore he was turned to be their Enemy, and fought againſt them, ſee Rom. 10. 6. to the 14th. Acts 13. 23. 26. 32. Of this Mans Seed God according to his promiſe hath raiſed unto Iſrael a Saviour Jeſus. Men and Brethren, Children of the ſtock of Abraham, and who ever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this Salvation ſent, and we declare unto you glad tidings, &c. ſee ver. 38, 39, 40, 46. before cited: And compare this with Luke 1. 67, 68, 69, &c. Bleſſed be the Lord God of Iſrael, for he hath viſited and redeemed his People, and hath raiſed up an horn of Salvation for us in the Honſe of his Servant David, &c. Mat. 25. throughout.

Mat. 28. 19, 20. All Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth, go ye therefore and Preach, &c. Acts 10. 36. 43. And this contains power to forgive Sins, Mat. 9. 6. So that you ſee what the Scripture ſaith to this point.

p. 2753. And then there is neither one Text of Scripture, nor one ſolid Reaſon againſt it, nor any ill conſequence at all that followeth on it.

1. There is not one Text of Scripture that ſaith Chriſt died not for all, or Chriſt dyed only for his Choſen, or any thing equivalent. The Texts commonly alledged, are, John 17. 9. I pray for them, I pray not for the World, 19. and for their ſakes I ſanctifie my ſelf, Joh. 10, 11, The good Shepherd giveth his Life for his Sheep, Rom. 8. 32. He that ſpared not his Son, but gave him up for us all, how ſhall he not with him alſo freely give us all things, 1 Cor. 5. 18. God was in Chriſt reconciling the World unto himſelf, not imputing to them their Treſpaſſes, Rom. 5. 8, 9, 10. For if when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more being reconciled we ſhall be ſaved by his life, John 11. 51, 52. That Jeſus ſhould dye for that Nation, and not for that Nation only, but that alſo he ſhould gather together in one the Children of God that were ſcattered abroad, Mat. 1. 21. for he ſhall ſave his People from their Sins, Joh. 15. 13. Greater Love hath no man than this, that a man to lay down his life for his friends, 1 John 3. 16. Hereby perceive we the love of God, becauſe he laid down his life for us, Rom. 8. 34. who is he that condemneth? It is Chriſt that dyed, yea rather, &c. 1 Pet. 3. 18. Chriſt hath once ſuffered for Sin, the juſt for the …njuſt, that he might bring us to God, 1 Pet. 1. 18, 19. knowing that you are not redeemed with corruptible things, as Silver and Gold from your vain converſation, received by Tradition from your Fathers, but with the precious blood of Jeſus Chriſt, p. 2781 Pet. 2. 29. He bore our ſins on the Tree, that me being dead to ſin ſhould live to Righteouſneſs, Tit. 2. 14. That he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purifie to himſelf a peculiar People zealous of good works, Eph. 5. 25, 26. Even as Chriſt loved the Church, and gave himſelf for it that he might preſent it to himſelf a glorious Church not having ſpot or wrinkle, &c. Iſa. 53. 11. By his knowledge ſhall my righteous Servant juſtifie many, for he ſhall bear their iniquities, John 17. 2. Thou haſt given him power over all fleſh, that he ſhould give Eternal Life to as many as thou haſt given him, Mat. 7. 23. Depart from me, I never knew you, &c. Heb. 9. 28. Chriſt was once offered to bear the Sins of many, &c. Heb. 10. 14. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are ſanctified, Pſal. 16 9. Their drink offerings of blood will I not offer, nor take up their name into my lips, Gen. 3. 15. The Seed of the Woman ſhall break the Serpents head, and his ſeed bruiſe her heel, Mat. 11. 25. I thank thee O Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, becauſe tho… haſt hid theſe things from the Wiſe and Prudent, and haſt revealed them to Babes, Eph. 1. 7. In whom we have Redemption through his blood the forgiveneſs of ſins, 2 Cor. 5. 21. For he made him to be ſin for us who knew no ſin, that we might be made the righteousneſs of God in him.

Theſe are all the Texts that at preſent I can remember, or find uſed by thoſe that write againſt Univerſal Redemption, which have any conſiderable ſhew of a proof. of all which there is not one that excludeth the Non-Elect▪ nor any in the World from being the Perſons for whom Chriſt dyed, as we ſhall ſee when we come to review them more particularly.

p. 279Nor is there any ill conſequence following the Doctrine of Univerſal Satisfaction, but all that terrifies men from it, is ſeeming ill Conſequences for want of right underſtanding it: moſt men think (who go that way) that Univerſal Redemption is inconſiſtent with abſolute Election, and with ſpecial differencing Grace, and with Chriſts ſpecial intention of calling and ſaving his Choſen, whereas indeed it is ſo far from being inconſiſtent, that it is neceſſarily concomitant and ſuppoſed, and they may as well think that Univerſal Creation is inconſiſtent with Election and ſpecial grace. Indeed God hath in admirable wiſdom laid Univerſal Grace as a ground work, and built ſpecial grace (as to the executive part) thereupon, and to deny the Univerſal Common grace, is to deſtroy the ground-work of ſpecial grace. If this were well underſtood, there would few ſober Divines be againſt Univerſal Redemption, and therefore I ſtill ſay, that it is a clear explication that muſt do more here (and is more needful) than argumentation. Yet becauſe ſome do ſo importunately call for Arguments I have given theſe Thirty (and might add many more) and ſhall now proceed to thoſe that are drawn from particular Texts of Scriptures having firſt laid down one or two more general conſiderations from the Scripture Language in this particular.

That Election and Redemption are not of the ſame extent, and not all Elected that are Redeemed, but Redemption is Univerſal, and Election ſpecial may be ſtrongly evinced by comparing p. 278together the language of the Scripture, concerning one and the other▪ how differently it ſpeaks.

1. We find God charging Men to give all diligence to make ſure their Calling and Election, 2 Pet. 1. 10. But not one word in all the Scripture to command or perſwade Men to make ſure that they are redeemed (unleſs we meant it not of the price, but the fruits:) Paul ſaith to his Converts, 2 Cor. 13. 5. Examine your ſelves whether you be in the Faith, know ye not your own ſelves that Jeſus Chriſt is in you except ye be Reprobates? But he never bid any man, examine thy ſelf whether thou be redeemed, or whether Chriſt dyed for thee? or whether thou be one of thoſe for whom Chriſt dyed? we have marks given in Scripture to know by, whether we are the Children of God or no? whether ſanctified, juſtified, pardoned, or no, but never a mark laid down in Scripture to know by, whether we are of thoſe that Chriſt dyed for; no more than there is to know whether we are of thoſe that God Created. And would not the perfect holy word of God have given marks of this, or bid men make ſure of this, and try it if it were needful, and were not unqueſtionable becauſe univerſal.

2. We find the Saints (as David) complaining of God's hiding his face, and ſeeming their Enemy, and writing bitter things againſt them, and groaning under that burthen of Sin, and crying for Pardon, and ſaying God had forſaken and forgotten them, &c. But we never find any Man good or bad (that believed Gods word to be true) to doubt whether Chriſt dyed for him, or whether he were Redeemed, or complaining p. 279of his danger for want of a Redeemer, or Expiatory Sacrifice.

3. We find God ordinarily ſaying of Chriſt Jeſus, that he is the Saviour of the World, and came not to condemn the World, but to ſave the World, and took away the ſins of the World, and is a propitiation for the fins of the whole World, and dyed for all, taſted death for every man, and was a ranſom for all, &c. But we have no one word in Scripture that ſaith he predeſtinated all to Salvation, or decreed to ſave the whole World: Nay, the very term of Election contradicteth Univerſality, for it is no chuſing if it be all, and if ſome be not left.

4. We find Wicked Men condemned, and their ſin aggravated for denying the Lord that bought them, 2 Pet. 2. 1. But never for denying the Lord that Elected them.

5. We find Chriſtians by the Apoſtles warned that they deſtroy not their weak Brethren for whom Chriſt dyed; and ſaying, through thy knowledge ſhall he periſh, &c. But he nevea ſaith, deſtroy not him (or by thy knowledge ſhall he periſh) whom God hath Elected: but contrarily, Chriſt ſaith, if it were poſſible they would deceive the very Elect.

6. We find them that fall away deſcribed to be ſuch as were ſanctified by the blood of the Covenant, but never to be ſuch as were Elected to Salvation. And their Sin is aggravated, as being a treading under foot the Son of God, and putting him to open ſhame, but not as treading under foot Gods Election. And their miſery is in this, that there is no more Sacrifice for Sin, but a fearful looking for of Judgment, p. 282and Fire, &c. But not that there is no more Election.

7. Men are warned to ſee that they refuſe not Chriſt that ſpeaketh and threatned that they ſhall not eſcape if they neglect ſo great Salvation, and they ſhall ſpeed worſe at Judgment than Sodom and Gomorrhah: But none are ſo threatned for ſinning againſt Election, nor are they warned to take heed of rejecting it; nor is it ſaid, how ſhall we eſcape if we neglect ſo great a mercy as Election. Alſo men that unworthily receive the Sacrament are ſaid to eat and drink damnation to themſelves, and to be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord: But no Man that is not Elect, is ſaid either to be the cauſe of his own Non Election, or to be guilty of abuſing or rejecting his Election.

8. Alſo I find men warned on pain of Damnation to receive Chriſt as their Redeemer, Be they never ſo wicked, it is our office to perſwade them to this; and therefore to preach the Goſpel to every Creature. But we are not to command men to take God for their Elector; I may not go to all the ignorant prophane men men in the Countrey and charge them to take God for their Elector.

9. We muſt command all men to love Chriſt as their Redeemer, and be thankful to him, and in thankfulneſs to obey him; and we may ſay to them, You are not your own, you are bought with a price, therefore glorifie God with your Bodies and Spirits for they are his. But we cannot perſwade all men to love God as their Elector or to be thankful to him for Election; p. 283or to obey God becauſe he hath choſen them.

10. We find Scripture telling us, how hardly fleſh and blood will digeſt the Doctrine of predeſtination, and how they will quarrel at Gods choſing one and not another, and how God ſtops their mouths with an anſwer drawn from his abſolute Lordſhip and Propriety over them, as the Potter over the clay, he may make them veſſels of honour or diſhonour, and do with his own as he liſt. But we never find any murmurrings of Fleſh and Blood that Chriſt ſhould die for one man and not for another: Nor do we find God ever acknowledging any ſuch thing much leſs giving them a reaſon from his Abſolute Dominion.

11. Beſides we find God uſeth to give the reaſon why men be not ſaved by Chriſt, from their own wilfulneſs and rebellious rejecting him. This is the cauſe given why his blood is not applyed to them. But when it comes matter of Election or Non-Election, the Anſwer is, Oh Man! Who art thou that diſputeſt againſt God? So that all theſe things laid together and conſidered, it ſeems to me clear, that Redemption is a Univerſal Cauſe, as Creation is, and not a thing proper to the Elect only, as Gods Election is; and that on this Univerſal Ground of Redemption, Chriſt is entitled the Redeemer of the World, and hath founded his jus Dominii & imperii, his right of Propriety and Government over all (even thoſe That will not that he ſhould Reign over them,) as God was called the Creator of the World becauſe he Created them, and on p. 282that ground did found his firſt Title of Dominion and Empire over all the World. And that Redemption hath no more an infallible connexion to the Salvation of all the Redeemed as ſubſequent, than Creation hath with the Salvation of all the Created: But both Creation and Redemption as they are the means between Election and its End, have an infallible connexion with the conſequent of the Salvation of the Elect.

2. It is a rule of great uſe, and approved generally by Divines, that when texts ſeem contradictory one to another, or ſeveral interpretations and opinions are contradictory indeed, that we muſt ever reduce uncertainties to certainties, and not contrarily certainties to uncertainties: and we muſt interpret obſcure texts by reducing them to the plain ones, and not the plain ones by reducing them to the obſcure. This rule Dr. Sanderſon preſſeth well: And Auguſtine ſaid excellently, [Shall we deny that which is plain becauſe we cannot comprehend that which is hid and ſecret? Shall we ſay that is not ſo which we ſee to be ſo, becauſe we cannot find why it is ſo? Aug. l. de bono perſever. c. 14] O that this rule were better obſerved! When God telleth us as plain as can be ſpoken, that Chriſt died for and taſted death for every man, men will deny it, and to that end ſubvert the plain ſenſe of the words, meerly becauſe they cannot ſee how this can ſtand with Chriſts damning men, and with his ſpecial Love to his choſen. It is not hard to ſee p. 283the fair and harmonious conſiſtency: But what if you cannot ſee how two plain Truths of the Goſpel ſhould agree? Will you therefore deny one of them when both are plain? Is not that in high pride to prefer your own underſtandings before the wiſdom of the Spirit of God, who indicted the Scriptures? Should not a humble man rather ſay, doubtleſs both are true though I cannot reconcile them. So others will deny theſe plain truths, becauſe they think that [All that Chriſt died for are certainly Juſtified and Saved: For whomſoever he died and ſatisfied Juſtice for, them he procured Faith to Believe in him: God cannot juſtly puniſh thoſe whom Chriſt hath ſatisfied for, &c.] But doth the Scripture ſpeak all theſe or any of theſe opinions of theirs, as plainly as it ſaith that Chriſt died for all and every man? Doth it ſay, as plainly any where that he died not for all? Doth it any where except any one man, and ſay Chriſt died not for him? Doth it ſay any where that he died only for his Sheep, or his Elect, and exclude the Non-Elect? There is no ſuch word in all the Bible; Should not then the certain truths and the plain texts be the Standard to the uncertain points, and obſcure texts.

Alſo Divines generally make it a rule for the Interpretation of Scripture, that we muſt not leave the moſt obvious plain ſenſe of the words, without neceſſity, and clear compelling evidence; Now then let them be viewed by any unprejudiced man, and let him tell us what is the plain and obvious ſenſe of theſe foreſaid words? And for my part I ſee no neceſſity of p. 286going from that plain ſenſe. Some here will tell me, then we muſt ſay Chriſt is a Door, a Way, a Vine, and the Bread is his Body, &c. But this is nothing to what I am ſpeaking of: For I did never ſay that we muſt take the literal ſenſe in oppoſition to the figurative, but only the plain obvious ſenſe in oppoſition to a wyerdrawn extorted ſenſe. Some figurative ſpeeches are ſo uſual, or plain and well known, that he that ſhould interpret them literally would be derided by any Plowman: And every ignorant man uſeth figurative ſpeeches in his common talk, and uſe makes the true ſence as plain and obvious as if they were not figurative. You can ſcarce hear three ſentences from any Countryman, but will convince you of this. If any man of common reaſon had heard Chriſt ſay; [I am the way to the Father] would he have thought his plain obvious ſenſe to be [I am an Earthly or other Material way to be trodden on by the Feet of them to come to God?] What will not the luſt of contradicting perſuade men to? Now I would know of any man, would you believe that Chriſt died for all men if the Scripture plainly ſpeak it? If you would, do but tell me, what words can you deviſe or would you wiſh more plain for it than are there uſed; Is it not enough that Chriſt is called the Saviour of the World? You'l ſay, but is it of the whole World? Yes, it ſaith, He is the propitiation for the ſins of the whole World? Will you ſay, but it is not for All men in the World; yes it ſaith he died for All men, as well as for all the World. But will you ſay, it ſaith not for every man? Yes that it doth, he p. 287taſted death for every man. But you may ſay, It means all the Elect, if it ſaid ſo of any Non-Elect I would believe. Yes, it ſpeaks of thoſe that denied the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themſelves ſwift deſtruction. And yet all this ſeems nothing to men prejudiced.

3. Furthermore, it deſerves conſideration, whether men can conſiderately go againſt the plain light of ſo many expreſs Texts of Scripture without ſome reluctancy and regret of Judgment? And then, whether uſing a mans Judgment to ſuch a courſe, to bear down the evidence of of many expreſs texts of Scripture, be not a matter of a dangerous nature, both ſymptomatically and effectually. Doth it not ſignifie a defect in our belief of the truth of Scripture? Or at leaſt of our reverend eſteem of it, when we dare uſe it as a Leaden rule, and Noſe of Wax (as the Papiſts preſumptuouſly call it.) He that can think it will endure ſuch bending, is in danger of thinking it may endure breaking. Hath it not too plain a tendency to infidelity and diſobedience? It is the truth of this word that muſt preſerve us from both. And he that thinks ſo meanly of the Scripture, as that it will patiently endure ſuch violence and ſtretching, is in great danger of being drawn to queſtion whether it be Gods Word or no, and of venturing over its bounds in practicals, in caſe of temptation. For what have we to perſuade us that Chriſt is the eternal God but plain Scripture? And is it plainer in this than in its affirming that Chriſt died for All? All tender conſcionable Chriſtians ſhould be as fearful to adventure p. 286againſt the plain meaning of Scripture in the matter of Faith, as to adventure againſt its plain precepts and prohibitions in matter of practice. And therefore I conclude that when God ſaith ſo expreſly that Chriſt died for All, and taſted death for every man, and is the Ranfom for all and the propitiation for the ſins of the whole World, It beſeems every Chriſtian rather to explain in what ſenſe Chriſt died for All men, then flatly to deny it.

The firſt text of Scripture ordinarily uſed, and which I ſhall inſiſt on, is Job. 3. 16. God ſo loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son that whoſoever believeth in him ſhould not periſh but have everlaſting life. Here it is plainly expreſſed that the giving of Chriſt proceeded from Gods Love to the World as the principal efficient, and that it was to this end, that whoſoever of this World believe in him ſhould be ſaved. One would think all were plain here, yet men have found or made almoſt as many knots as words. If a King had his whole Army prove falſe to him and turn to the Enemy; and when they are in his power the Enemy Impriſoneth them, and maketh them Slaves, in this miſery the King ſaith of them [I ſo love my Army that I give ſo much money or my own Son in Ranſom, that whoſoever will thankfully accept my kindneſs, and return to his Allegiance, ſhall not remain in ſlavery but be delivered fully into my favour and their dignities] would not ordinary men eaſily underſtand this ſpeech? Would ſo many doubts be raiſed, whether he mean the whole Army or part? What is meant by [Love] by [Whoſoever] p. 287&c. yet here we have ſuch a duſt raiſed in as plain a caſe, or as plain words as ſuch Divine myſteries could well be expreſſed by.

1. It is doubted what is meant by [the World.]

2. And then what is meant by [Loved.]

3. And what is meant by [Whoſoever.]

The 4. What is meant by [Believeth in him] we need not here ſtand on.

And for the firſt ſome ſay by the VVorld, is meant the Elect part of the VVorld: ſome ſay (as Dr. Twiſs and others) it is meant of Mankind as diſtinct from Angels, excluding none, and not of the Elect only; and withal that it ſpeaks only of the ſufficiency of Chriſt's Satisfaction; which if it were not ſufficient for All, there were no place for the General Promiſe, Whoever believeth ſhall be Saved. There is more truth and ſoundneſs in this expoſition, than will ſtand with ſome other contradictory paſſages in the ſame Authors. For my part I ſtand to this expoſition of Dr. Twiſs (as you may find him induſtriouſly explaining this text, Vindic. Grat. lib. 1. part. 2. § 7. pag. (mihi) 203.) I will repeat part of his words, [Ad locum illum (Joh. 3. 16.) quod attinet, negamus ex his evinci poſſe [Mundum] eo in loco ſignificare [Electos] in mundo degentes. Ad cujus loci majorem elucidationem, obſervandum eſt cum decreviſſet Fidem & Reſcipiſcentiam electis ſuis non modo concedere, ſed & eaſdem modo naturae ipſorum rationali convenientiſſimo, nempe per Suaſionem & exhortationem in ipſis operari & conſequenter Evangelium ſub generali invitationis formâ proponendum eſſet in hunc modum [Quiſquis crediderit, ſalvus erit: qui non, damnabitur] p. 288hinc evincitur mittendi Mediatoris duplicem Deo habendam fuiſſe rationem, alteram Pretii; alteram Efficaciae Nam & Pretium oportuit ſufficiens eſſe redimendis omnibus; alias enim tam generali promiſſioni [quiſquis crediderit ſalvus erit] locus nullus fuiſſet: & rurſus oportuit efficax eſſe redimendis electis: alias enim fruſtra fuiſſent conſtituti ad obtinendam ſalutem per Jeſum Chriſtum, ſi ſalutem per Chriſtum non fuiſſent aſſecuturi. His hunc in modum conſtitutis, apparet fieri poſſe ut quaedam loca Scripturae de Chriſto mediatore tractent, quoad pretii ipſius ſufficientiam, alia vero quoad mortis ejus efficaciam. Locum autem hunc de quo agimus exiſtimo, ſignificare tantum pretii ipſius ſufficientiam. Ratio eſt quia agit, non de efficacia Spiritus ſancti, in danda hominibus fide, ſed de modo quo fides dari ſolet, nempe per predicationem Evangelii & Generalem omnium invitationem ad fidem in hanc formam [Quiſquis credit in Chriſtum, non peribit, ſed habet vitam aeternam] Hujus autem invitationis Generalis fundamentum, eſt pretii a Chriſto ſoluti ſufficientia. Atque hic rurſus ſeſe in gerit foreign peculiaris divinae clementiae propenſio in genus humanum, quod ſcilicet pro peccatis humani generis pretium ſufficiens ſolutum iri voluit non autem pro peccatis Angelorum.

For the better underſtanding of this, it muſt be remembred that there is a double efficacy of Chriſts death.

1. Its ſatisfying God's Juſtice for the Sins which Chriſt bore.

2. The effecting of Pardon, Juſtification, Sanctification, and Salvation of Sinners. It is only of this latter that ſolid Divines ſpeak, when p. 289they diſtinguiſh the efficacy of Chriſt's death from its ſufficiency: But the former (the effecting of ſatisfaction) is preſuppoſed to the ſufficiency (as being the proper immediate end of Chriſt's death) for there is a double ſufficiency.

Firſt, a ſufficiency material, antecedent to ſatisfaction (paſſive as we may call it) by which it is ſaid to be ſufficient to ſatisfie God for all Men.

Secondly, A ſufficiency of this price and ſatisfaction ſo made for the pardoning and ſaving of all that will believe. It is the latter ſufficiency which is to be diſtinguiſh'd from the latter efficiency, and that implies ſome efficiency as neceſſary to that ſufficiency, viz. The efficiency of ſatisfaction. And the Doctor can be underſtood no otherwiſe here than according to this interpretation.

1. Becauſe he makes it the neceſſary ground of the general promiſe, without which it could have no place. Now leave out the efficiency of ſatisfaction to Juſtice from Chriſt's death, and it is no more a ground for an Univerſal promiſe, than if he had not paid a ſatisfaction materially ſufficient at all: For it is not ſufficient to pardon all men, if they did believe, except Juſtice be firſt ſatisfied for them.

2. He expreſly makes it to be ſufficientia pretii, and not ut ſit pretium, (though I know elſewhere he contradicts that.)

3. He makes it the interpretation of thoſe Scriptures that ſpeak of Chriſts dying for all, which cannot be if he ſatisfy'd not for all.

p. 2904. He makes a general promiſe and invitation to be grounded on it: But ſurely Chriſt is not with his Salvation given ſo much as conditionally to any but whom by ſatisfying for them he hath purchaſed that mercy to.

5. Yea he expreſly in his Reaſon ſhews, that by the efficacy of Chriſts death, he means that which conſiſteth in the Spirits efficacy in working Faith.

Others ſay, that by [the World] is meant only the Elect, but not as Elect, but as they are Gentiles who are called the World in contradiſtinction to the Jews. This cannot be true, for

Firſt, Then no Elect Jews ſhould be included, but it ſhould run thus, God ſo loved the Gentiles, that he gave his only Son, &c.] whereas Chriſt was ſent to Jews as well as Gentiles, and that firſt in ſome reſpects.

Secondly, This way croſſeth themſelves alſo, for the Gentiles conſiſt of Elect and non-Elect, and therefore according to their Doctrine it ſhould only run thus [God ſo loved part of the World] if the Gentiles be the World, or elſe they muſt ſay, that by [the World] is meant the Elect part of the Gentiles. But I ſhall prove further that this is falſe, by proving that it includeth the Non-Elect alſo. By [the World] it is evident is not meant the containing World, the Air, Earth, &c. Nor Angels, or unknown Superiour Creatures, nor yet brute Beaſts, but the Men living on Earth. It is granted that the uſual obvious ſenſe of words is not to be denied without evident cauſe, and when there is cauſe of denying that ſenſe, we muſt go but to p. 291the next obvious and uſual ſenſe, and not to a remote unuſual improbable one. Now it is known that the word [World] uſed for Men, doth moſt directly and obviouſly ſignifie Mankind in general, without excluding any. Next to that it ſignifieth the greater part or common ſort of the World. Next that it ſignifieth the generality or greater part of ſome Country where the ſpeaker then is; not to ſpeak of more remote ſignifications. If therefore we be forced to forſake the firſt ſignification, it muſt be proved that we are alſo forced from the ſecond before we muſt take the third, and both ſecond and third muſt be diſproved, before we can take the World for the Elect only.

2. The effects of that love, and giving of Chriſt here mentioned, are undoubtedly ſuch as are given to all, and not only to the Elect (as to the Tenor of the Law or Deed of Gift, they are given to all Mankind, and as to the promulgation, they are given to all thoſe that hear the Goſpel.) Therefore the World here mentioned is all, and not only the Elect. I think none will deny the Conſequence, and for the Antecedent, it is evident through all the Scripture as well as this Text. The effect of the giving of Chriſt here expreſſed, is the conditional gift of Salvation: But the conditional gift of Salvation is to all, and not only to the Elect, Ergo, &c. [That whoſoever believeth in him ſhould not periſh] is a plain giving of Salvation on condition of believing; it being uſual in Scripture and common ſpeech, to make [whoſoever will] and [if you will] equally conditionally. Whoſoever will, let him take the water of Life freely, is equivalent p. 292to this [it ſhall be yours if you will take it.] If you beat up the Drum for Souldiers, you proclaim [whoſoever will come to ſuch a place and liſt himſelf under ſuch a Commander, ſhall have Entertainment and Pay,] here [whoſoever will come and liſt himſelf,] is equivalent to [if any or all of you will come and liſt your ſelves] So that where they put the queſtion, whether the word [whoſoever] be diſtributive? I anſwer, no, not directly, it is but the univerſal extenſion of the Conditional Promiſe, with an expreſſion of the conditionality; but conſequently it is diſtributive, though Antecedently and directly it be not. As in the former Compariſon, when you ſay [whoſoever will liſt himſelf, &c] the word [whoſoever] is not directly diſtributive, for you offer all that hear you that priviledge, and all may accept it if they will, and then there would be no diſtribution: But becauſe all will not, and this is foreknown, therefore conſequently it is diſtributive. So here; and that it is diſtributive is from the will of Man, and the event, and other exteriour differencing Cauſes; but not properly from the promiſe or deed of gift at all, except by accident.

3. The next words ſhew what [World] it is that is here ſpoken of, viz. That which comprizeth men that believe, and ſo are not Condemned; and thoſe that believe not (which Conſideration is conſequential, and not antecedent to Chriſt's dying for them) and ſo are Condemned already, becauſe they have not believed, &c. v. 18. They that will affirm a greater reſtriction in the ſenſe of the word, muſt prove p. 293it. For (though I have proved here the larger ſenſe) yet indeed it belongs to them to prove their aſſertion, who recede from the commoner and more extenſive ſenſe. I ſhall briefly examine what they ſay to that end.

Only I muſt intreat the Reader, that if they compare my Writings with any Book which contains the Reaſons which I confute, that you would not expect that I ſhould take any notice of any of thoſe ſtrangely-confident, Juvenile, Triumphant Expreſſions which ſome do abound with, but that I draw out only the pith of their Arguments, and ſet Reaſon againſt Reaſon, and let the heaps of Worldly Rhetorical Gloryings alone: Much more muſt I expect that you will not take me to be engaged to defend any Arminian miſinterpretations and weakneſſes, and to confute what any man ſaith againſt them, but only that which ſeems of force againſt the interpretations or aſſertions that I my ſelf do maintain.

The firſt Reaſon they give for proving that it is only the Elect that here are called the World, is drawn from the Love which is here ſaid to have the World for its object, which cannot be common to all, but is proper to the Elect. This we deny, and they attempt to prove by theſe five Reaſons.

1. Say they, it is the moſt tranſcendent and remarkable Love, and therefore proper to the Elect. I muſt deſire the Reader to ſee this anſwered afterward in my anſwer to their interpretation of John.

2. It is an Eternal act of God's will.

p. 294Anſw. But what that is to the purpoſe I know not.

3. It was the cauſe of ſending Chriſt.

Anſw. That's true, it was one cauſe, but how follows the conſequence?

4. They ſay that Love which is the cauſe of giving Chriſt, is always the cauſe of beſtowing all other good things.

Anſw. That Love which cauſed the giving of Chriſt for the Elect, is the cauſe of giving them all things with him; but that love which cauſed the giving of Chriſt for all, ſhall not eventually give them all things. I refer you to what I ſhall ſay anon to Rom. 8. 32. for the full anſwer to this.

5. They ſay this Love is an aſſured Fountain of Salvation to all that are beloved with it.

Anſw. I deny it, if they mean by [aſſured] ſuch as ſhall eventually be ſaved; but, ſay they, the iſſue of this Love being not periſhing but obtaining Eternal Life, happens only to the Elect, Ergo, &c.

Anſw. The Text ſpeaks of no other effect of this Love, but the giving of Chriſt, and the giving of Eternal Life on Condition of believing. Now for the former, there is a twofold giving of Chriſt; Firſt, giving him on the Croſs for us. Secondly, Giving him in the word of Promiſe to us.

The Text ſeems to comprehend both. He is given on the Croſs for all, he is given in the word conditionally to all, and ſo is Eternal Life with him.

Now, though the actual right to Eternal Life and fruition of it be not the portion of all, yet p. 295that makes no alteration or differencing nature in this Univerſal Conditional promiſe, it is becauſe one believed, and another did not. The Promiſe antecedently to the performance or non-performance of the Condition, gave Chriſt alike to the Elect, and non-Elect, and Life with him. But that ſome believed rather than others, was not from the gift of this Univerſal Conditional Promiſe, but from another cauſe, even Gods ſecret decree of Election.

Their ſecond Reaſon for proving that by [the World] is meant only the Elect, is becauſe it is the ſame World that Chriſt came to ſave, ver. 17. but that is only the Elect, elſe God ſhould fail of his intention.

Anſw. This is to pervert one Text by perverting another, as I ſhall ſhew anon, when we come to that Text.

Their Third Reaſon is, that its uſual to call the Elect the [World.]

Anſw. It was a very Pious Judicious Grave Divine that ſaid [I profeſs I cannot find any one clear place where [the World] muſt of neceſſity be taken for the Elect only. Ezek. Culverwell in his Anſwer to Objections againſt his Treaty of Faith.]

They alledge for what they ſay theſe Texts, John 4. 42. where Chriſt is called the Saviour of the World, a Saviour of Men not ſaved, is ſtrange.

Anſw. So are all things ſtrange to Men till they underſtand them. It's no more ſtrange than that God Created all Men to Life (that Happineſs which the firſt Covenant promiſed) who yet did dye for Sin.

p. 296The Second is John 6. 33, 57. which ſhall be vindicated anon.

The Third is Rom. 4. 13. Abraham is ſaid by Faith to be Heir of the World, which ver. 11. is called to be [the Father of the Faithful.]

Anſw. A bold interpretation, but here's no proof, nor appearance of any that the Father of the faithful is all one with (Heir of the World) is too unlikely a thing to be received on a Mans bare word: Eſpecially conſidering that it is proper to Abraham to be (Father of all them that believe) verſe. 11. But to be Heir of the World, verſe 13. is not proper to him: For it is ſaid, (the promiſe, that he ſhould be Heir of the World, was not to Abraham or to his Seed, through the Law.) I never read where Abraham is called (Heir of the Faithful) nor can he ſo be conveniently called: But he is called Heir of the World: Therefore by the World is not meant only the Faithful.

The Next is Rom. 11. 12. If the fall of them be the Riches of the World, and the diminiſhing of them the riches of the Gentiles, &c.]

Anſ. It is more than the Elect Gentiles that ſhall be and are enricht by Chriſt (though not as the Elect) others are enriched with that Church ſtate viſible, which Paul here ſpeaks that the Jews were broken off from: As alſo with the Goſpel, and ordinances, and conditional gift of Chriſt and juſtification and glory; beſides many other mercies. The next Text cited to prove that the [World] is put only for the Elect is Col. 1. 6. [Which Goſpel] is come unto you, as it is in all the World, and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth alſo in you. &c.

p. 297Anſ. 1. It is not ſaid, that it bringeth forth fruit in all the World, but that it is come into all the World, and bringeth forth Fruit, viz. in ſome where it comes.

2. But ſuppoſe it were otherwiſe, doth not Chriſt ſay, that the Goſpel doth bring forth fruit in more than the Elect, viz. in many that fall away when Perſecution ariſeth? Mat. 13. And in whom the cares of the World do choak that Fruit.

3. Were theſe Coloſ. all Elect to whom Paul ſpeaks?

4. It is a known truth that the Goſpel comes to more than the Elect; for many are called, but few choſen; next they alledge 2 Cor. 5. 19. which makes ſufficiently againſt their whole cauſe as ſhall be ſhewen anon, when we come to it. Another place cited by them is, 1 Joh. 2. 2. Chriſt is the propitiation of the ſins of the whole World.

Anſ. If they may thus beg the queſtion, all Texts ſhall mean as they would have them. Of this anon. Another place cited is Pſal. 22. 27. All the ends of the World remember and turn unto the Lord: And all the Kindreds of the Nations ſhall worſhip before thee: For the Kingdom is the Lord's, and he is the Governour among the Nations.]

Anſ. 1. [All the ends of the World] is not ſo large as [all the World.]

2. It is plain that this Text ſpeaks of the eſtabliſhment of Chriſts viſible Kingdom, which contains more than the Elect. The Net of the Goſpel brings Fiſhes good and bad. The Heathen Countries that have turned to the Lord from Paganiſm and Infidelity, have not all believed to Salvation. The Kingdoms of the p. 298World ſhall become the kingdom of the Lord and of his Chriſt: But they are not all Elect.

Theſe are all the Texts that I find urged to to prove that by the World is ſignified only the Elect.

2. And what if it were ſo in ſome places?

1. It follows not that it is ſo here.

2. The uſual Senſe muſt not be forſaken without cauſe: Nor is it ſufficient that unuſually it is otherwiſe taken.

3. The conjoyned words will ſhew the neceſſity of a reſtrained Senſe, where ſuch a Senſe is neceſſary to be received; but ſo they do not here, but contrarily, as hath been ſhewed.

Their 4th. Reaſon to prove that by the [World] is here meant [the Elect only] is this. If every one in the World be intended, why doth not the Lord in the purſuit of this Love reveal Chriſt to all ſo loved?

Anſ. This is to be fully anſwered anon among the main Objections, by it ſelf.

Laſtly, they ſay, elſe all theſe will follow.

1. That ſome are beloved and hated alſo from Eternity.

2. That God's Love towards innumerable is fruitleſs and vain.

3. That the Son of God is given to them that never hear word of him, and have no power granted to believe in him.

4. That God is mutable in his Love, or elſe he ſtill loveth thoſe that be in Hell.

5. That he gives not all things to them to whom he gives his Son.

6. That he knows not certainly before, who ſhall believe and be ſaved.

p. 299Anſ. To the firſt I thought no Antiarminian Divine ever denied it. God hateth all the Workers of iniquity, Pſal. 5. 5. You will not ſay, that he hated them not from Eternity: Many of the Workers of iniquity are Elect, and ſo loved from Eternity. God's Love is ſpoken, ſay Divines, ab effectu, potius quam ab affectu. God from Eternity ſo loved Men, not Elect, as to give them on Creation Everlaſting Life in Adam, on condition of fulfilling the firſt Covenant; and to give them everlaſting life in Chriſt on condition of believing according to the ſecond Covenant: And yet he decreed not to give any Men Grace to perform the condition of the firſt covenant; nor to give all men Grace to perform the condition of the ſecond.

To the 2d. Conſequence I ſhall anſwer fully by it ſelf anon among the contrary Arguments.

To the 3d. alſo I ſhall there anſwer.

To the 4th. I ſay (for it is not worth a fuller anſwer.)

1. All Divines that I know ſay that God loveth thoſe in Hell, as his Creatures and as Men: Aquinas and the reſt of the Schoolmen have it frequently: Yea Urſine, Rob. Baronius and many of our Proteſtant Divines ſay, that he puniſheth thoſe in Hell ſhort of their deſerving, and ſo ſheweth ſome mercy there; that I will not meddle with.

2. If you ſpeak of God's Love as it is in effectu and not in affectu, then it is certainly mutable. He gives Men thoſe mercies, which for their …buſe he removeth or turneth to judgments. He gives to all a conditional Pardon, and Life: And after condemneth moſt to Death for not performing p. 300the condition. To the Elect themſelves theſe Effects are changeable.

3. If you ſay, God's Love is but his Velle bonum alicui; and therefore he cannot be ſaid now Men are in Hell to continue to will them a conditional Pardon and Life: Therefore God's Love muſt be mutable. I anſwer, Let thoſe Owls that love to blind themſelves by gazing on the Sun of God's undiſcernable Infiniteneſs, undertake to tell what God's Love is, and what his Will is, and how he Wills that which is paſt, &c. For my part I pretend not to a capacity of diſcerning any ſuch things.

2. You may enforce your objection as ſtrongly concerning God's Love to the Elect: He once willed their Creation, then he willed to redeem them by Chriſt, then he willed to call them, and to give them their firſt juſtification, to deliver them from this ſickneſs and that danger, then he willed that they ſhould die, and then that they ſhould riſe again: If you will tell me how God after the Reſurrection, will continue to all Eternity, to will to create Man, to redeem him, to call him, juſtifie him, deliver him, raiſe him, &c. then I will tell you how God will Eternally will the giving Chriſt Pardon and Salvation conditionally to all. If you ſay, he Wills them as preterita, and not as preſentia vel futura; you may ſay ſo by this. If you ſay, that there is no preteritum vel futurum with God, but all preſent, and therefore he willeth them as preterita ſic dicta quoad hominem vel fidem menſuram humanam, ſed ut preſentia quoad Deum; the like you may ſay here alſo.

p. 301To the 5th. Conſequence I muſt anſwer anon by it ſelf when we ſpeak of their Argument from Rom. 8. 32.

To the 6th. It is a naked affirmation, as eaſily denied. Dare Men ſay, that it was no mercy or love of God, to give mankind in Adam Eternal Life on condition of keeping his Law, becauſe God foreknew or foredecreed, they would not or ſhould not keep it? And ſo not attain the fruit of that Govenant thereby? Dare theſe Men (pretending to preach the Goſpel) tell their hearers, that to all of them (except the Elect) the preaching, the Goſpel (and therein the offer and conditional gift of Chriſt, Pardon, Juſtification and Salvation is no mercy, nor from any love of God to them? And ſo that in rejecting it they never were guilty of rejecting or ſinning againſt any love or mercy?

Having examined what they ſay, to prove that by [the World] is meant [the Elect only] I find it needleſs to examine the reſt about the Senſe of the word [loved] and [whoſoever] partly becauſe what they ſay requires not much confutation, and partly becauſe enough is ſaid on occaſion of this. I affirm that by love is not meant a meer natural affection, nor yet a meer Act: (But if we muſt ſpeak of God after the manner of Men) it is an Act proceeding from the goodneſs of God's nature. And I deny not this Act to be free: And therefore take not natural, For,

Phyſical (as if God loved us as the Fire burned, quantum in ſe)

p. 3022. Nor yet Conſtrained: And it muſt be obſerved, that both the Text, and thoſe that thus interpret it, ſpeak only of God's Love to Mankind or the World, and not directly to the [Salvation of the World.] The conditional gift of Salvation to the World is the Effect of that love to the World; and it is true love, though it infallibly procure not that Salvation.

And for the other words [whoſoever believeth] as I have ſaid before, they are primarily and directly the conditional expreſſion, and to all: But ſecondarily and accidentally diſtributive, becauſe all perform not the condition. So Rom. 10. 13. Whoſoever ſhall call on the Name of the Lord ſhall be ſaved: Which verſe 9. is conditionally thus expreſſed [if thou believe and if thou confeſs] and verſe 11. It is put in equipollent terms, whoſoever believeth on him ſhall not be aſhamed. So Rom. 9. 33. Joh. 11. 26. Act. 10. 43. Whoſoever believeth in him ſhall receive Remiſſion of Sins. Act. 2. 21. Joh. 12. 46. Mar. 10. 15. Mar. 8. 34, 38. Mat. 18. 4. and 5. 19, 21, 22, 28. and 10. 14, 32, 33, 42.

The 2d. Text that I ſhall alledg, is the next Verſes, Joh. 3. 17, 18, 19. For God ſent not his Son into the World to condemn the World, but that the World through him might be ſaved. He that believeth on him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already; becauſe he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that Light is come into the World, and Men loved darkneſs rather than Light, &c.]

p. 303Here 1. It is expreſly ſaid that Chriſt came into the World, that the World by him might be ſaved: And therefore he died for them.

2. Yet this World is diſtributed into ſuch as believe and are not condemned, and ſuch as believe not and are condemned: And therefore it is not only the Elect.

3. This condemnation is for not believing; which, as I have proved, preſuppoſeth Chriſt's dying for them.

Now let us ſee what they bring to prove that by the World here is meant only the Elect. They tell us here of a notable foreign as if by the Word [World] were meant ſeveral things, when here repeated: But for proof of what they ſay, you muſt take their words. Is it not good Senſe and true to ſay [God ſent not his Son into the World,] viz. into the World of mankind, or among Men, [to condemn the World] viz of Mankind [but that the World] of Mankind [through him might be ſaved.] But what if their various acception were granted? Still the World that Chriſt was ſent to ſave, is divided into Believers eventually ſaved, and Unbelievers eventually condemned. If this be denied, the next words annexed are ſo clear, that I deſire the Reader, but without prejudice, to conſider them, and uſe no violence with his judgment in expounding them. Their Reaſons for their Senſeare theſe.

1. Becauſe all are not ſaved: And the Lord hath ſaid he will do all his pleaſure, and his purpoſe ſhall ſtand.

Anſ. 1. He will do all that he is pleaſed to do: But not all that he is pleaſed to command Man to do: Nor all that he is pleaſed p. 304to promiſe to Man on certain conditions, when thoſe conditions are not performed. His purpoſe ſhall undoubtedly ſtand: But when will it be proved that God did purpoſe or reſolve eventually, and actually to ſave that World that is here meant? As God hath a Will de rerum eventu, and a Will de debito, which I call Legiſlative: So each act of his Will hath its proper end (as we may aſcribe any end to Gods Will, diſtinct from himſelf by improper ſpeech.) His decreed or purpoſed ends he always attains (ſuppoſing them abſolute: For I will not in this place touch that controverſie, whether God have a conditional decretive Will de rerum eventu: But his Legal preſcribed ends he doth not always attain. The end of his Law is the fulfiling of its conditions, and Mans attaining the reward thereby: This may be called God's end.

1. In that God preſcribeth it to Man to be by him intended; and ſo ſending Chriſt into the World to ſatisfie his juſtice, he hath bound the World to ſeek and accept Life and Salvation in and by him.

2. In that God hath made Chriſt and Faith to have the nature of a means, in reference to that command: And all Men are bound (that hear the Goſpel) to take Chriſt by believing in him, as a means of Salvation provided by God.

3. Becauſe God hath truly made to all Men a deed of gift, or a legacy of Chriſt and Salvation with him to all that will take him, and therefore he may well be ſaid, to have given Chriſt that the World through him might be ſaved: Having given them Salvation in Chriſt they will have it.

p. 3054. He therefore giveth Chriſt to the World of Unbelievers, that conditionally they may be ſaved: That is, if they will: That is, if they will have Salvation in and with Chriſt. And

5. In ſo doing God doth all that belongs to him to do as Legiſlator: For it muſt be underſtood that here he ſpeaks thoſe words [that the World by him might be ſaved] not as abſolute Lord meerly or properly, but as Rector per Leges. And it belongs to him as Legiſlator, only to propound Salvation, to Man as his end: And to promiſe it on his conditions, and preſcribe thoſe conditions and command Man to perform them: And to threaten him with the loſs of that end (of Salvation) if he perform them not. But to give Faith, which is the condition it ſelf, doth not belong to God as Legiſlator. (No Man living can claim the firſt Act of Faith, or effectual Grace thereto, from God by any promiſe that he hath made): But he giveth it as Dominus abſolutus, and as one that may do with his own as he liſt. So that it is Finis preſcriptus & conditionaliter datus, that is here ſpoken of; aud not Finis Decretus to be by God eventually infallibly accompliſhed. It is the end of Gods Law, and Legiſlative Will, and ſo of God as meer Legiſlator or Rector per Leges: And not of his decretive Will de eventu, and of God as abſolute Lord above Laws, without them diſpoſing of his own. (The prediction of Events doth collaterally and ſecundum quid belong to his Law: But not per ſe and directly.)

And 6. Conſider, that if it be never ſo much denied that God hath properly a conditional Will de rerum eventu, yet it is beyond all queſtion p. 306true, that he hath a conditional Will de debito, (officii, Praemii & Poenae) and ſo his Law is contidional moſt commonly. He hath conſtituted the Debitum praemii, the dueneſs of Salvation on condition of believing, loving and ſincerely obeying Chriſt. And therefore they muſt not deny conditional promiſes and threatnings, though they deny conditional, decrees. This I add, becauſe I know they here uſually anſwer that God intendeth no end conditionally, but where he intendeth alſo the condition it ſelf, that ſo it may be equivalent to abſolute: But he intendeth as Legiſlator that Faith ſhall be the preſcribed means to Glory, and Glory the end promiſed to all that perform that condition; and ſo conditionally giveth it.

7. Conſider alſo that even in regard of Gods Will de Eventu, our Divines generally with the Schoolmen confeſs and maintain that God hath a conditional Will in this Senſe.

That is, that he willeth ſuch a thing ſhall be a condition of the accompliſhing, giving or event of another thing; and ſo that he willeth Faith ſhall be a condition of Salvation: Though nothing be the condition of Gods Act of Willing. So that ex parte voliti it is conditional, though not ex parte actus volentis.

This Dr. Twiſs ſaith o…t conſid. of Tilenus Sinod of Dort and Arlis reduced Page 61. He ſaith [Ger. Voſſius interpreteth the Will of God touching the Salvation of all, of a conditional Will, thus: God will have all to be ſaved, to wit, in caſe they believe: Which conditional Will in this Senſe, neither Auſtin did, nor we do deny] And Page 143, 144. I willingly profeſs p. 307that Chriſt died for all, in reſpect of procuring the benefit, (of Pardon and Salvation) conditionally on condition of their Faith] and againſt Cotton p. 74 [Still you prove that which no man denieth, viz. that God purpoſed Life to the World upon condition of Obedience and Repentance, provided that you underſtand it right; viz. that Obedience and Repentance is ordained of God, as a condition of Life, not of Gods purpoſe.

8. And laſtly, Let it be conſidered that Chriſt being man, we may the better ſpeak after the manner of man concerning him; and ſo aſcribe to him a Velleity, or a VVill which attains not the thing willed in a ſenſe beyond all thoſe ſenſes before mentioned.

All this I have laid here together that it may ſerve when the like queſtion or text falls again in our way, and ſo I muſt take leave to refer you hither. And by this may very many Scriptures be interpreted, which aſcribe ſuch Velleities and Unaccompliſhed willings to God: Yea were theſe few lines given in anſwer to this queſtion well weighed, (if through partiality I over-value them not) I think they might give much light to ſhew the true mean in the greateſt of the Arminian Controverſies.

The ſecond Reaſon they give, that it is the Elect only that are here meant by the VVorld, is, becauſe the moſt of men were at that inſtant actually damned.

Did he ſend his Son that they might be ſaved?

Anſ. This is anon to be anſwered by it ſelf as a great argument againſt Univerſal Redemption; and I am loath to repeat one thing p. 308oftener than needs I muſt. Only I ſay, when Chriſt died Millions of Men were actually ſaved: Did God ſend his Son to ſave them that were ſaved already? yes, no doubt: even to do that which he had undertaken to do preſently on the fall, to pay a ſufficient ſatisfaction for the ſins of all, whether ſince that undertaking they be ſaved or damned.

Thirdly, They ſay, Chriſt was appointed for the fall of ſome, therefore not that all and every one might be ſaved, Luke 2. 34.

Anſ. Themſelves will faſten no other ſenſe on that of Luke but this [God hath decreed to permit many through their own wilfulneſs to ſtumble and fall on Chriſt: and ſo he ſhall by accident, or as an occaſion, be their ruine] Now this is no whit inconſiſtent with Gods ordaining him to be per ſe and directly a means for all mens Salvation, in the ſenſe before fully opened.

4. They ſay, the end of God in ſending Chriſt was not contrary to any of Gods Decrees; which were eternally fixed concerning the condemnation of ſome for their ſins: Did he ſend his Son to Save ſuch?

Anſ. 1. As it is no contradiction for God to command an action, and to decree the non-futurition of that action; ſo it is no contradiction for God as Legiſlator by his Law or Teſtament to ordain that Salvation ſhall be to every man the end preſcribed him when he is commanded to believe; and faith a means to that end; and to give him Salvation under his hand in his Teſtament on condition of believing; and to purpoſe accordingly that he ſhall be ſaved if he will believe; and yet at the ſame time either p. 309not to Decree to give him Faith, or to Decree not to give him Faith, and conſequently not actually de eventu to ſave him.

2. Do not theſe men know that they vent all theſe confident zealous inſultings, directly againſt the Scripture expreſſions, as well as againſt ours? Doth not Chriſt ſay to Hieruſalem, How oft would I have gathered thee, as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her Wings, and ye would not? yet did not God decree their not being ſo gathered? Are you ſure that all thoſe Jews were Elected and Saved to whom Peter ſaith Act. 3. laſt. To you firſt God ſent his Son Jeſus to bleſs you, in turning every one of you from his Iniquities? Or rather, is it not ſpoken of the end of Gods Legiſlative Will, and ſo is meant of a conditional gift? God will ſo bleſs you, if you are willing or reject it not? For by turning from Iniquity there is meant the work of Sanctification following the firſt act of Faith, and perhaps of Juſtification too. Multitudes of ſuch expreſſions may be found in the Scripture, which I am loath needleſly to tire my ſelf and the Reader with the recital of.

The third Text which I ſhall alledge is that of the ſame importance with both the former, John 12. 47, 48. And if any man hear my words and believe not, I judge him not, for I came not to judge the World, but to ſave the World. He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have ſpoken, that ſame ſhall Judge him at the laſt day. An ordinary wit would think that Chriſt had ſpoken here ſo plain and full as to ſtop the paſſage againſt all ſober exceptions; For,

p. 3101. In the 46 verſe Chriſt ſaith, I am come a Light into the World, thereby ſhewing that he is an Univerſal Cauſe, as the Sun is of Light, which is the ſame in its ſhining to all, though ſome are blind, and therefore ſee not by its Light, yet that is not either for want of Light in the Sun, or becauſe it ſhineth differently to one and to the other, but becauſe their Eyes are not capable of enjoying and uſing its Lights ſo is Chriſt as a Satisfier and as the object of juſtifying Faith; though efficienter as the Author of Faith by his Spirit, he worketh differently.

2. It is the World into which and among whom Chriſt is ſaid to come as a Light.

3. The end of his coming is the conditional Illumination of all. That whoſoever believeth on me ſhould not abide in darkneſs.

4. This World containeth ſuch as [hear Chriſts words and believe not.]

5. Leſt any ſhould have a pretence to think, that the World, which he came to be a Light to, was only the Elect, and thoſe that believed not were no part of them▪ he repeateth all again more plainly, ſaying, he came not to judge the World but to ſave the World.

6. To put all out of doubt that Unbelievers were part of this World that he came to ſave, he addeth the cauſal conjunction [For] proving that, or giving it as a reaſon why, he would not Judge Unbelievers, becauſe he came not to judge the VVorld (what force was in that reaſon, if they were none of that VVorld) but that to ſave the VVorld. VVas it any proof that he would not judge Unbelievers p. 311becauſe he came not to judge but to ſave the Elect?

7. Yet that there might be no place for doubting left, he again ſheweth that Unbelievers are part of this VVorld that he came not to Judge but to Save, ſaying, He that rejecteth me and receiveth not my words, hath one that Judgeth him, which is plainly oppoſed to the former negation, I judge him not, and, for I came not to Judge the World.

I know not what can be ſaid againſt this, but the former objection, that it is only the VVorld of the Elect that Chriſt came to ſave: But I have ſaid enough in anſwer to that, and ſhall, ſay more anon. As for their feigned foreign here are expreſſions plain enough to exclude it: and were it granted, it would do them no good; except withal they prove not only that by the VVorld, v. 46. is meant the Earth (which yet is unſound) but that by the VVorld in both parts of the 47. v. is meant only the Elect; which they will, I think, never be able to prove. And indeed their pretended foreign doth make Chriſts reaſon to be invalid, and ſo contradicteth the Text.

The fourth Text to the ſame ſenſe is, Joh. 6. 32, 33, 35, 36, 40, 51, 64, 66. compared; where note,

1. That the perſons he ſpake to were many unbelieving murmuring Jews, yea and many of his own Diſciples which yet believed not, ver. 60. 61, 64. that is, ſuch as followed him and profeſſed to be his Diſciples; & yet did not heartily and firmly believe, and therefore they then p. 312went back and walked no more with him, v. 66.

Yet 2. Note, That to all theſe Chriſt ſaith, ver. 32. My Father giveth you the true Bread from Heaven. For the Bread of God is he which cometh down from Heaven and giveth Life to the World; yet ver. 36. he tells them, that they believe not, and ver. 51. I am the living Bread which came down from Heaven. If any man eat of this Bread he ſhall Live forever, and the Bread that I will give is my Fleſh, which I will give for the Life of the World. Where note, not only that the gift is univerſal for the Life of the World; but alſo that he puts the giving his Fleſh for the VVorld.

1. As that which he will do abſolutely without any condition.

2. And which he puts in order of nature, before the ſecond act, which is the giving his Fleſh to men to eat (which is the application of the benefits of his death.)

3. And then comes their eating or not eating, and ſo living or not living after both theſe. At leaſt it is undeniable that Chriſt here gives his Fleſh to more than do take and eat it, even to them that believe not, but forſake him from that day. And therefore the Jews ſay, ver. 52. How can this man give us his Fleſh to eat? Now what is ſaid againſt this? The anſwer I find in theſe words in one VVriter [That the VVorld here cannot ſignifie All and Every one, that ever were or ſhould be, is as manifeſt as if it were written with the beams of the Sun, and that becauſe it is made the object of Chriſts intendments to purchaſe for them, and beſtow upon them Life and Salvation. p. 313Now I ask, Whether any man, not bereaved of all Spiritual and Natural ſenſe, can imagine that Chriſt in his Oblation intended to purchaſe Life and Salvation for all them whom he knew to be damned many ages before? or who dares affirm once that Chriſt gave himſelf for the Life of them, who notwithſtanding that, by his diſappointment do come ſhort of it to eternity? ſo that if we had no other place to manifeſt that the word [VVorld] doth not always ſignifie All, but only ſome of all ſorts, as the Elect are, but this one produced by our Adverſaries, to the contrary, I hope with all equitable Readers our defence would receive no prejudice.]

Anſ. If this be true, I muſt confeſs my ſelf, bereaved of all Spiritual and Natural ſenſe; which yet I am not willing to do, ſeeing by one I ſhould confeſs my ſelf no Chriſtian, and by the other, not a man, at leaſt to have no reaſon in exerciſe. This is a heavy charge on all the Fathers, and later Divines and Godly People that differ from this Author. Specially unleſs his Reaſons were ſtronger; for I confeſs his Sun-beams are wholly clouded to me. His firſt reaſon is anſwered briefly already, and muſt be fully afterward by it ſelf. The fleſh of Chriſt was Morally given preſently on the fall, before any of the VVorld was in Hell: and therefore it muſt be phyſically given on the Croſs in time, according to that undertaking which was the moral gift and ſatisfaction.

2. His ſecond Reaſon is alſo anſwered fully before, and ſhall be after. If Chriſt give Salvation to all on condition they will receive it p. 314in him, then we may dare to affirm that this is the fruit of the giving himſelf on the Croſs: may we not dare to affirm that God created all mankind in Adam, that they may live to him and ſo be bleſſed, (as Urſine and multitudes of our Divines do affirm) though yet, he knew that man would do otherwiſe eventually? For God commanded him to live to him, and gave him means, and promiſed him everlaſting Happineſs if he obeyed. And why may we not as well ſay Chriſt Redeemed men to Salvation, that yet for rejecting it are not ſaved? As ſhewing themſelves unworthy of eternal Life. But I like not his phraſe, that men come ſhort of Salvation by Gods diſappointment. Gods not giving them Faith, nor yet his adjudging Unbelievers to Death, are neither of them to be called his diſappointing them of Life. But becauſe he asks, who dare ſay this? let us next ſee whether the Holy Ghoſt dare not.

The fifth Text which I ſhall inſiſt on is 2 Pet. 2. 1. But there were falſe Prophets alſo among the People, even as there ſhall be falſe Teachers among you, who privily ſhall bring in damnable Hereſies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themſelves ſwift deſtruction. And verſe 20, &c. For if after they have eſcaped the pollutions of the World through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, they are again intangled therein and overcome, the latter end is worſe with them than the beginning: For it had been better for p. 315them not to have known the way of Righteouſneſs, then after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them: But it is happened to them according to the true Proverb, The Dog is turned to his own Vomit again, and the Sow that was waſhed to her wallowing in the mire.] VVhereto for fuller explication add but Jude's words of the ſame men, ver. 4. Ungodly men, turning the Grace of our God into Laſciviouſneſs, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jeſus Chriſt,] put all theſe together becauſe they all ſpeak of the ſame men.

Now 1. The Text expreſly ſaith, they denied the Lord that bought them.

2. That it is the Lord Jeſus that is this Lord, appears,

1. In that it is expreſly ſaid in the 20. ver. that it was by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, that they eſcaped the pollutions of the VVorld.

2. Jude expreſly ſaith, They denied the Lord Jeſus Chriſt.

3. There have been few that have denied God among all Apoſtates in compariſon of thoſe that have denied Chriſt: Nay, it is a great doubt whether it can be proved of any, directly that were in thoſe times.

4. Their Apoſtacy is deſcribed by turning from the holy Commandment delivered to them, which is called the way of Righteouſneſs, and to their former Vomit (which muſt needs be the ſtate they were in before they turned Chriſtians) and to the mire, after they were waſhed; And this ſtate of Apoſtacy is oppoſed to eſcaping the pollutions of the World, by the knowledge of the p. 316Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, ſo that it is left paſt doubt that it is the Lord Jeſus Chriſt that bought them whom they are ſaid to deny. And Jude ſaith of them, that they are twice dead, plucked up by the roots, by which it appears that after their firſt death, they had received ſome kind of new Life by Chriſt.

Laſtly, Note, that here are many benefits which they received, which could not have befallen them, but through the Death of Chriſt; They could no other way have been waſhed, and have eſcaped the worlds pollutions, and have known the way of Righteouſneſs, &c. yea Jude ſaith, They turn the Grace of God into Laſciviouſneſs, therefore it was a ſin againſt Grace: and all Grace is by the blood of Chriſt: yea it ſeems they had themſelves ſome Grace, that is, (Mercy contrary to merit and tending to a recovery) which they ſo turned into Laſciviouſneſs. And Peter in the next chapter ſhews that their Apoſtacy lay in a not-believing Chriſts ſecond coming, becauſe of his ſeeming delay, and therefore they gave themſelves up to their Luſts, and ſaid mockingly, Where is the promiſe of his coming? ſo that it is both evident that they were purchaſed by Chriſt, and that it is Chriſt that bought them whom they are ſaid to deny.

Yet as plain as the Holy Ghoſt hath here ſpoken, what induſtry is uſed to raiſe a Duſt, and compel theſe words to receive an alien ſenſe.

1. It is ſaid that all things for Univerſal Redemption are here Uncertain: but againſt it, this is certain.

p. 3171. That there are no ſpiritual diſtinguiſhing fruits of Redemption aſcribed to thoſe falſe Teachers, but only common gifts of light and knowledge which Chriſt hath purchaſed for many for whom he did not make his Soul a Ranſom.

2. That elſe the Redemption of any by the blood of Chriſt, cannot be a peculiar aggravation of the ſins of any, becauſe they ſay, he died for all: and yet this buying of the falſe Teachers is held out as an aggravation of their ſin in particular.

Anſ. 1. It is here meerly beg'd and never was yet proved, that Chriſt hath purchaſed common gifts of light and knowledge for men without making his Soul a Ranſom, i. e. his Life a ſatisfaction for them, and that all that he ſatisfied for have diſtinguiſhing fruits of Redemption. It is eaſier to take theſe as certainties than to prove them ſo.

2. Redemption is no aggravation of that mans Apoſtacy, that never was an Apoſtate. It cannot be ſaid, that they deny the Lord that bought them, who never denied him: And therefore it is a common aggravation of the ſin of all that do ſin againſt him, and of all their denial that do deny him: but all do not deny him. May not that be an aggravation of theſe mens ſins in particular, which would alſo aggravate the ſins of any other, according to the ſeveral quality of the ſin? May it not be ſaid of an Atheiſt▪ [He denieth the God that made him,] as an aggravation of his particular ſin? and will you by force of VVit thence prove that God made not all men? Now to the uncertainties.

p. 318And 1. They ſay it is uncertain whether Chriſt as Mediator be here intended as Lord or no; there is not any thing in the Text to enforce us ſo to conceive.

Anſw. It may enforce the unprejudiced I think; review what I have produced out of the Text to prove it. But they give theſe reaſons againſt it.

1. God only, as God with his dealing toward ſuch, is mentioned, of Chriſt not a word.

Anſw. 1. Is not Chriſt God? And from this Text Divines have proved it (joined with Jude 4.) againſt the Arrians; and muſt we give up that argument for nothing? 2. I have before ſhewed ſpecial mention of Chriſt.

2. They ſay [the name foreign properly Herus, attended by Dominion and Soveraignty, is not uſually if at all given to our Saviour in the new Teſtament, &c. Nay is the name proper for our Saviour in the work of Redemption? foreign is ſuch a Lord and Maſter as refers to ſervants and ſubjection.

Anſw. 1. I hope we muſt not alſo deny Chriſts Dominion and Soveraignty, and deny our ſelves to be his Servants and Subjects, (as he is Mediator) only that we may the better deny his Univerſal Sacrifice and Satisfaction: If we do, it will be a dear bought concluſion. All power in Heaven and Earth is given to him, and the Father hath committed all judgment to him, and for that end he Died, Roſe, and Revived, that he might be Lord of the Dead and Living, Matth. 28. 19. John 5. 22. Rom 14. 9.

2. It is ſufficient if here it be evident that foreign is applied to Chriſt; ſeeing there is no p. 319diſſwading reaſon can be brought from the word. It is undoubtedly true of the reign of the Mediator, in the largeſt ſenſe; (now all power is given to him) that foreign as it is ſaid of God, Pſal. 103. 19. by the Sept. Eraſmus ſaith, ſiquid intereſt foreign privati juris nomen eſt, foreign honoris & authoritatis: And then we may ſee that both both belong to Chriſt, and yet no wonder if he be more often called foreign.

3. If it were God the Father that is here called Lord, yet all is one to the main point, for he … Deus Redemptor, and he bought them by the blood of his Son, but that's the next Queſtion.

2. They ſay it is uncertain that by [buying] is meant purchaſing with the ranſom of his blood.]

Anſw. 1. What other price than Chriſts blood doth God buy men with?

2. I have proved it before, that it was purchaſing with Chriſt's blood; both in that Jude mentioneth the Lord Jeſus Chriſt (and ſome think that the former Title (the only Lord God) is given of Chriſt too, and the place invincible to prove Chriſts Godhead;) and in that the benefits received by them could come no other way. But let us ſee their Reaſons.

1. They ſay the Apoſtle inſiſteth on a Compariſon with the times of the Old Teſtament, and the Falſe Prophets that were then among the People.

p. 320Anſw. What of that?

1. Is not the Compariſon clear, as thoſe falſe Prophets were part of the Typical Redeemed People, ſo are theſe of the truly Redeemed.

2. That Typical Redemption out of Egypt was not only a Type, but alſo a Fruit of Chriſts Redemption, in its moral being conſidered.

1. They ſay the word foreign, ſignifieth primarily the buying of things, tranſlatitiouſly the Redemption of Perſons.

Anſw. 1. It ſignifies any buying in the Market for a price, whether thing or perſon. And what other buying with a price can you here deviſe?

2. It's well known the Holy Ghoſt uſeth it to ſignifie Chriſt's purchaſing of us by his blood, what means it, Rev. 5. 9. foreign and Rev. 14. 3. foreign And 1 Cor. 6. 20. foreign, Rev. 14. 4. with many the like.

2. They ſay [Here is no mention of blood, death, price, or offering of Jeſus Chriſt, as in other places where proper Redemption is treated on.]

Anſw. 1. As if foreign did not alone ſignifie to buy with a price.

2. Hath every place that treats of proper Redemption ſuch an addition? View thoſe before cited, and be convinced of the contrary, what's added, Rev. 14. 3.

The third Reaſon is, that [the Apoſtle affirms their deliverance to conſiſt in the eſcaping p. 321of the pollution of the World, as Idolatry, falſe Worſhip, and the like, by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, plainly declaring that their buying was only in reſpect of the enjoyment of the knowledge of the truth, but of the waſhing in the blood of the Lamb, he is wholly ſilent.

Anſw. The queſtion is of the ſatisfaction by Sacrifice, whether Chriſt bought them thereby: This Reaſon is from the effects and application, if they had not ſo much as eſcaped this pollution of the World, it would not follow that Chriſt did not buye them by his ſatisfaction, but only that they received not this benefit of it.

2. It is eaſier beg'd than prov'd, that Chriſt ſatisfied for none but thoſe that are waſhed by his blood.

3. If it had been ſaid that they were waſhed in the blood of the Lamb, had it not been eaſie for the ſame wit to have found another interpretation? and to have ſaid it was ſpoken but foreign, becauſe they profeſſed it to be ſo?

4. He that will well prove that God can and doth ſo far relax his Law, as to give all theſe mercies without Chriſt's ſatisfying for them to whom they are given, viz. waſhing, eſcaping the Worlds pollutions by the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour; yea, clean eſcaping from them who live in errour, ver. 18. &c.) will do the Socinians a greater pleaſure, and ſay more againſt the neceſſity of Chriſt's ſatisfaction, than ever I ſaw yet done by any.

And here I would have one ſtrange paſſage obſerved in very many Divines, that it may appear p. 322how prejudice & ſtudium partium, prevails in Mens Studies, and how much the Will can command the Underſtanding. When we plead that God doth in pardoning Sin for Chriſt's Sacrifice relax his Law, or diſpence with it, and not properly execute it according to its ſenſe, they ſtifly deny it, and ſay that it is but an interpreting it foreign according to its reſerved exception, and that Chriſt's ſuffering was the proper fulfilling of the Law, and the Reaſon they give is, becauſe they think it of flat neceſſity that the Law be executed according to its ſenſe, or elſe it ſhould not be true; or at leaſt God ſhould not be juſt; (even Eſſenius himſelf forſakes Grotius in this point,) and yet theſe ſame Men will maintain either that God doth without any ſatisfaction at all ſo far relax the ſame Law to wicked men, as to give them all the mercies which they enjoy (viz. illumination, a taſt of the good word of God, and the powers of the World to come, to be made partakers of the Holy Ghoſt, and believe for a time, and be ſanctified by the blood of the Covenant, and loved of Chriſt, and clean eſcape from them that live in errour, and to eſcape the World's pollutions, and be waſhed, &c.) or elſe that God doth this without relaxing his Law, and ſo, that by the rigorous Law of Works Sinners are not deprived of theſe Mercies. To the Non-Elect God relaxeth that Law without ſatisfaction, which to the Elect he doth not, yea cannot relax upon ſatisfaction. Theſe things are harder to me than to be well digeſted.

p. 323Before I come to their laſt Reaſon, I will give you the Judgment of ſome Orthodox Interpreters on this Text, that you may ſee whether it be the Mediator Chriſt, or the Father only, whom they are here ſaid to deny; and whether it be meant of proper Redeeming, or ſome mercy which they had without Chriſt's dying for them.

1. And the firſt ſhall be Calvin, whom I hope in this Controverſie none will except againſt, his words are theſe, in loc. [Etiam Dominum qui illos redemit. Tame…ſi variis modis abnegatur Chriſtus, eum tamen hic meo judicio attingit Petrus, qui extrimitur apud Judam; nempe dum Gratia D…i in l…ſciviam convertitur. Redemit enim nos Chriſtus, ut populum haberet ſegregatum ab omnibus mundi inquinamentis, addictum ſanctitati & innocentiae. Qui igitur excuſſo fraeno in omnem licentiam ſe projiciunt, non immeritò dicuntur, Chriſtum abnegare a quo Redempti ſunt.] But becauſe Calvin judgeth (truly) that theſe are the ſame that are ſpoken of in Jude 4. Let us ſee what he ſaith of that Text alſo, leſt you think he overſhot himſelf here through inadvertency. His words are theſe; [Chriſtum vero abnegari intelligit, Quum hi qui ſanguine ipſius Red…mpti fuerant, diabolo ſe rurſus mancipantes, incomparali…e illud pretium, quantum in ſe irritum faciunt.

And that you may ſee foreign is taken for Chriſt both in Peter, and here, and that this is a full Teſtimony for Chriſt's Godhead, it being Chriſt that is here called, [the only Lord God, and our Lord,] ſee the foregoing words. p. 324[Deum, qui ſolus Herus eſt: Vetuſti quidam Codices habent [Chriſtum qui ſolus eſt Deus ac Herus] & certe. (Others ſay it is an uncertainty) in ſecundâ Petri Epiſtolâ, ſolius Chriſti fit mentio & ille herus vocatur.] You ſee Calvin ſpeaks both for the ſenſe of theſe Texts, and the point of Univerſal Redemption as much and as plain as I.

The ſecond ſhall be the Divines of the Aſſembly in their laſt Edition of their Annotations. Thus they ſay [The Lord that bought them, that gave a price ſufficient for them, even his own precious blood, Acts 20. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20. 1 Pet. 1. 18, 19.] This is their firſt expoſition, and as a ſecond, they add that from their profeſſion. And they refer us farther to Jude 4. where they ſay thus [Denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jeſus Chriſt; denying Chriſt to be God, who was their Maſter by profeſſion (for they profeſſed themſelves to be of his Houſehold) and their Lord by publick Authority over them, or by their deeds denying Chriſt] ſo that foreign is Chriſt in their judgment in both places; and this Text ſpeaks for Chriſt's Godhead.

The Third ſhall be Deodate, who ſaith [that bought them, viz. who by the price of his blood, which they had profeſſed to be partakers of through Baptiſm, had gotten the Right and Title of Lord and Maſter over them, to make them his Servants, ſee Heb. 10. 29.]

4. Beza alſo expounds it of Chriſt as their Redeemer profeſſedly.

5. Dr. Willet expoundeth Jude 4. (which is confeſſedly the ſame with this of Peter in ſenſe) thus [and deny God the only Lord and our Lord Jeſus Chriſt. Theſe words thus Tranſlated p. 325ſeem to ſpeak of two Perſons, of God the Father, and God the Son: But indeed the whole Sentence is to be underſtood of Chriſt, who is called God and foreign Maſter, and foreign Lord, So that Lord here in the firſt place ſhould be tranſlated Maſter: For Chriſt is God in reſpect of his Godhead with his Father. He is our Maſter, becauſe he hath bought us, 2 Pet. 2. 1. He is our Lord, becauſe by him all things are preſerved, 1 Cor. 8. 6. Heb. 1. 3. So that he is God as our Creator, Lord as our Preſerver, Maſter as our Redeemer.

6. Mr. Dav. Dickson on 2 Pet. 2. 1. expoundeth it of Chriſt as profeſſed by them to be their Redeemer.

7. Eraſmus's Paraphraſe is plainly, they ſhall deny Chriſt by whoſe blood they were Redeemed, and whom they profeſſed.

(Many more are here omitted.)

8. Even Piſcator himſelf confeſſeth it ſpoken of Jeſus Chriſt, and ſaith thus [Per quas illi abnegaturi ſint Dominum, id est, Chriſtum, qui ipſos mercatus eſt.] & [Periphraſis Chriſti argumentoſa quaſi dicat: Chriſtus illos est Mercatus, ergo non debebant eum negare. Mercatus est, viz pretioſo ſuo ſanguine, Conſer. Acts 20 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20.] Then comes he in with his laſt ſhift, not foreign ſed foreign

I'll not now ſtand to tranſcribe any more, theſe being of ſuch Authority, and ſo impartial and the laſt the moſt extream in theſe Controverſies of almoſt any Learned Judicious Pious Divine.

3. I come next to the Third and laſt Reaſon, which is given to ſhew that Chriſt bought p. 326not theſe men: The foreſaid Author ſaith Neither is it more certain that the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of the purchaſe of the Wolves and Hypocrites, in reſpect of the reality of the purchaſe, and not rather in reſpect of that eſtimation which others had of them, and by reaſon of their outward ſeeming profeſſion ought to have had, and of the profeſſion that themſelves made to be purchaſed by him, &c.] This is the great anſwer, which is the laſt refuge: It was foreign, and not foreign. I am aſhamed unfeignedly to remember the time when I took up with this interpretation my ſelf, and had the face to maintain it.

Conſid. 1. It was no act of theirs which the Apoſtle mentions, (which profeſſion, though diſſembled, might have warranted him to aſcribe to them, as he may call thoſe Holy, that ſeem to be Holy by profeſſion:) but it is an Act of Chriſt (and his paſſion) long ago performed: He bought them.

2. It is not an act aſcribed to them during the time of that profeſſion, while that profeſſion might have better warranted a miſtaking charitable judgment; but it is after by Apoſtacy they caſt away that profeſſion, and ſo if before we might have indulged a charitable miſtaken judgment, yet after we may not.

3. It is the words of the Holy Ghoſt who is the Spirit of truth, and ſent to lead the Apoſtles into all truth: And ſhall we feign the Spirit of Truth to aſſert a falſehood, meerly becauſe men profeſs that falſehood, and this after they reject that profeſſion. Wicked men ſay Chriſt bought them, and afterward renounce or deny Chriſt, p. 327therefore the Spirit of God ſhall write it to the Churches as Gods word, that Chriſt did buy them, even they who once falſely ſaid ſo, but now deny him: O what a bold dealing it is with the Holy Ghoſt to interpret his words thus, without any need or fair reaſon!

4. May not a Man by this dealing ſay what he will as the meaning of Scripture? May not almoſt any truth of God expreſly affirmed in Scripture, be ſaid to be ſpoken foreign, and not foreign? God ſaith as Man would have him, and in giving his Laws to be a rule to the World, he ſpeaks untruly, becauſe men ſpeak ſo before him, making their ſpeeches the rule of his ſpeech, which is a rule to them.

Blame us not too zealouſly, if we do not ſwallow theſe things ſo eaſily; even meerly becauſe Mr. ſuch a one, or ſuch a one ſaith ſo.

But let us ſee why they ſay ſo; for ſure they have ſome ſhew of reaſon why.

1. They ſay, [It is the perpetual courſe of Scripture to aſcribe all thoſe things to every one that is in the fellowſhip of the Church, which are proper to them only who are true ſpiritual Members of the ſame, as to be Saints, Elect, Redeemed, &c.

Anſw. 1. All profeſſed Chriſtians are Saints by ſeparation from the World to the Church Viſible, and Elect or choſen to that Condition.

2. Scripture ſpeaks thus of none but thoſe that ſeem to be ſuch; the Penmen of Scripture therein ſpeaking of men that knew not the heart.

p. 3283. But when by denying Chriſt they manifeſt the contrary, doth the Scripture ſay yet that they were Elect Saints, &c. or rather that they were before of old ordained to this Condemnation?

4. Why elſe may not we ſtill uſe this Language, if it be true that it is the perpetual courſe of Scripture? Be not then offended with us if we write and ſay that Chriſt redeemed by his blood all profeſſed Chriſtians; Nay, then we might ſay Julian was a Saint Elect, and ſo was Judas, &c.

5. I would our Brethren of the ſeparation would ſpeak in the ſame Language when they are judging of Church-Members, and Communicants, as they do when they uſe theſe Arguments againſt Chriſts Univerſal Ranſom, or at leaſt come near to this charitable vein, laying by the deluſory part.

2. But the great prop of this Cauſe is, that they will prove from other Texts that the Scripture ſpeaketh thus. And three Texts I find urged, and I may ſafely ſay ſadly abuſed.

The firſt is, Mat. 27. 53. Hieruſalem is called the Holy City, becauſe it was ſo in eſteem and appearance] ſaith my Author.

Anſw. Muſt we needs take his bare word for this, when we know it was Holy by Gods own ſeparation of it from the reſt of the World, for the principal place of his publick Worſhip, and reſidence of his Church and Prieſts, and ſo denominated by himſelf? What Man then will believe that it was called Holy, meerly from the Peoples profeſſing to be Holy?

p. 329The Second Text is John 5. 18. It is ſaid of Chriſt that he had broken the Sabbath, which he only did in the corrupt Opinion of the blinded Phariſees.

Anſw. 1. The words ſeem to ſpeak only of the Jews accuſation of him, i. e. what they charged him to have done, and not what he did, [therefore they ſought to lay hands on him, not only becauſe he had broken the Sabbath, &c.]

2. Diſtinguiſh between breaking the reſt of the Sabbath naturally (by Natural actions, contrary to reſt but without ſin) and breaking it morally by ſin. The former way Chriſt did break the Sabbath, the latter he did not, take this diſtinction from Chriſt himſelf, who tells you, that the Prieſts in the Temple brake the Sabbath (viz. the external reſt of it, by labour) and are blameleſs (and therefore broke it not morally.)

But the Text that I find alledged moſt frequently and confidently by very many Learned Men, is 2 Chron. 28. 23. (and I deſire God to forgive me, that in my ignorance I have oft ſo abuſed it my ſelf) The words are theſe [For he Sacrificed to the Gods of Damaſcus that ſmote him; and he ſaid, becauſe the Gods of the King of Syria help them, therefore will I ſacrifice to them, that they may help me] The laſt words are confeſs'd to be the falſe words of the deluded Idolater Ahaz; but all the queſtion is of the former words, which are the words of the Holy Ghoſt [He Sacrificed to the Gods of Damaſcus that ſmote him,] where by ſupine overſight, p. 330Men have taken it, as if the Text made this ſmiting the act of the Gods, whereas it makes it the act of Damaſcus, or the Men of Damaſcus. It was Damaſcus that ſmote him, and not the Gods of Damaſcus, according to the Text.

Tremelius and Junius render it thus plainly, [Sacrificavit enim Diis Damaſcenorum percutientium ipſum] not Diis Damaſcenorum percutientientibus ipſum. And would one think now that ſo great a ſtreſs ſhould be laid by prudent ſober men, on ſuch an overſight. Darmeſek being a collective, the Cities name put for the Peoples (than which nothing more uſual when there is mention of the acts of Cities and Countries) did truly ſmite Ahaz: As England did ſmite Scotland: Or Rome conquered ſo much of the World: And Venice holds War with the Turk.

2. What if it had been otherwiſe? May not God give power to thoſe Devils which were the Gods of Damaſcus, really to ſmite Ahaz? As well as he gave the Devil power to ſmite Job a better man.

3. And what if all that they ſuppoſed of this Text had been true? If God had ſpoke in ſo ſtrange a language once in all the Bible? If we ſhall thence take liberty to interpret him ſo elſewhere, without proving this to be the ſenſe, we may then indeed make any thing of the Scripture. And though I doubt not but God in mercy will bear with the weakneſs of good men that by the power of prejudice do run on ſuch expoſitions, having a zeal for God, though not according to knowledge, and ſuppoſing p. 331themſelves neceſſitated to it; yet certainly the proper natural tendency of ſuch violent dealing with Scripture is to infidelity it ſelf, and the queſtioning of the truth of Scripture: and if we eſcape that, we lie fair open to the invaſion of Popery, to conceit a neceſſity of an Earthly final Judge of the ſenſe of Scripture as being inſufficient to manifeſt its own ſenſe. In the mean time, how do we gratifie Papiſts and Scepticks by this dealing.

But inded the Text is plain; though I confeſs the Septuagint; and ſome Tranſlators might give occaſion to ſome of this common miſtake.

The ſixth Text that I ſhall alledge is, Heb. 6. 4▪ 5, 6. For it is impoſſible for thoſe who were once inlightened and have taſted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghoſt, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the World to come, if they ſhall fall away to renew them again to Repentance; ſeeing they crucifie to themſelves the Son of God afreſh, and put him to open ſhame.

Here theſe Apoſtates are ſaid to crucifie the Son of God afreſh foreign It is not barely to crucifie Chriſt again, but to crucifie him to themſelves again: That is, either finaliter (as ſome expound it) or efficienter (as others) which way ſoever it be, it is not efficaciter, but quantum in ſe.

1. If it be the firſt, then the meaning is this: If ſuch be ſaved, then it muſt be by a new Sacrifice, and ſo they bring themſelves into that caſe that Chriſts Death on the terms that firſt it was accepted, will not ſerve to ſave them, p. 332(becauſe he died not to ſatisfie for that ſin.) So Paraeus expoundeth it; ſed quomodo hoc faciendo Chriſtum denuò crucifigunt ſibimetipſis? Quia filium Dei ſemel crucifixum abnegando, nolunt ſalvari ejus morte ex qua ſola dependet reſipiſcentia & ſalus. Si igitur reſipiſcere & ſervari deberent, denuò crucifigendus eſſet eis Chriſtus; quod eſt impoſſibile, quia amplius mori non poteſt. Sic infra cap. 10. Videtur declarare, non eſt eis reliqua hostia pro peccato poſtquam unicam Chriſti hoſtiam ſemel abjecerunt & conculcarunt. Impoſſible igitur eſt eos reſipiſcere & ſervari.

So Calvin alſo: Porro haec ratio eſt cur iterum dicat Chriſtum crucifigi, quia nos hâc conditione illi commorimur, ut meditemur perpetuam vitae novitatem. Qui… ergo in mortem recidunt, opus habent ſecundo ſacrificio, ut capite decimo habebimus. Crucifigentes ſibi; hoc eſt, quantum in ſe eſt.

Yea Beza himſelf who ſeeing what might be ſaid for Univerſal Redemption from this Text endeavours to put in a bar, yet concludeth thus: Et fortaſſe ſic poteſt iſta ſententia explicari acſi declaretur iſtos non poſſe rurſum renovari, quoniam rurſus oporteret Chriſtum crucifigi & illis ludibriis exponi, quod fieri amplius non poteſt, illo ſemel pro mortuis credituris crucifixo, nec in gratiam iſtorum apoſtatarum rurſum crucifigendo: quam ſententiam ſi amplectamur uti ſane probablis & commoda mihi videtur, &c.] I will add no more (though many more might be added. Now according to this expoſition it is evident that it is implied that Chriſt died for theſe men: or elſe there ſeems no force in the Argument to prove their ſin unpardonable, and themſelves unrecoverable. For the Holy Ghoſt here plainly intimateth p. 333that this unrecoverableneſs is the fruit of their Apoſtacy; and that they were not unrecoverable before they were Apoſtates; and yet the reaſon of their uncureableneſs lies in this, that it is neceſſary to their pardon and cure that Chriſt ſhould die again, which cannot be: Now it implieth that he died for them as they were in their ſtate before Apoſtacy, or elſe on this reaſon it might be ſaid as well that their recovery and pardon was as impoſſible then, and ſo their Apoſtacy ſhould not be the reaſon, but Chriſts not dying for them at all ſhould be it: Which is plainly contrary to the Text.

But if any will needs deny this moſt probable interpretation, and expound it efficienter, [that they do as much as they can to kill Chriſt again by their malice and contempt, and making him to be but as a malefactor, do approve of the Jews crucifying him] (as Grotius and many more expound it) ſtill it intimates that their ſin did put him to Death once before or elſe, what force is there in the Argument? For it ſeems to run thus, [they, that as much as in them lieth, put Chriſt to Death twice (or a ſecond time) are remedileſs: But ſo do theſe Apoſtates, Ergo, &c.]

Now if their ſin (as the pro-cauſa meritoria) had no hand in his Death at firſt, how can they be therefore remedileſs for endeavouring it a ſecond time? For it was but once by them. And if the ſame ſin was pardonable in thoſe that not only in deſire but in act, did put him to Death, viz. the Jews; then it appears that it was a pardonable ſin: And that the ſame ſin, p. 334(nay the Conatus or meer deſire of it) which was pardonable then, ſhould become unpardonable ſince, as it is a fancy, and hath no Scripture proof; ſo it is apparently falſe, ſeeing it ſuppoſeth that the Law of Chriſt is not now the ſame as then, which is falſe.

A ſecond Argument for Univerſal ſatisfaction, this Text affordeth us: Chriſt ſatisfied for all thoſe who are inlightened, and have taſted of the Heavenly Gift, and are made partakers of the Holy Ghoſt, &c. But ſome Non-Elect are ſuch: Therefore Chriſt ſatisfied for ſome Non Elect, and conſequently for all.

This Argument is urged before, therefore I ſhall ſay little to it. Some anſwer to the Minor that it is to be denied, becauſe this Text doth nihil ponere ſed tantum ſupponere.

Anſwer, But it doth not ſuppoſe that which never was nor will be, nor is poſſible. Moſt Interpreters (almoſt all) that are againſt Univerſal ſatisfaction, do expound this Text of thoſe gifts which may and oft are really loſt: The number is ſo many that I will cite none

2. It is further ſaid by ſome, that theſe benefits preſuppoſe not Chriſts dying for them.

Anſwer, This is anſwered already. They that can prove that God can, will and doth give all theſe without ſatisfaction to his Juſtice firſt made, are but a ſtep from Socinianiſm, and p. 333may next ſay, he can and will give pardon without ſatisfaction: And then they are within a ſtep of infidelity, and next in danger of ſaying, that Chriſt Died in vain, ſurely the Holy Ghoſt is given by Chriſt Crucified, and I think only to them for whom he was Crucified. The Devils are not therefore uncurable (for ought any Scripture reveals) becauſe they would put Chriſt to Death, through malice, if it were in their power; nor had they ever theſe fruits of his Death. But according to their ſenſe againſt whom I argue, the Devils might hence be ſaid to be unpardonable as well as Apoſtates. Which is no Scripture Doctrine.

The 7th. Text, which I ſhall urge is, Heb. 10. 26, 27, 28, 29. For if we ſin wilfully after we have received the knowledg of the Truth, there remaineth no more Sacrifice for ſins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which ſhall devour the Adverſaries. He that deſpiſed Moſes Law, died without mercy, under two or three Witneſſes: Of how much ſorer puniſhment ſuppoſe ye, ſhall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden nunder Foot the Son of God, and hath counted the Blood of the Covenant wherewith he was Sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done deſpight to the Spirit of Grace? Hence I raiſe two Arguments.

1. Thoſe who receive the mercies here mentioned are of the number of them for whom Chriſt diéd: But ſuch are ſome Non-elect, Ergo, &c. The Blood of the Covenant is ſhed before it is ſprinkled, or Sanctifieth (ſhed Phyſically or morally) and it cannot ſanctifie Men, before p. 334it is ſhed for them. For Sanctification, being ſome degree of application, preſuppoſeth it ſhed for them: I mean, If by Sanctification, be meant, either ſeparation relative from the World to the Church, and to Chriſt ſecundum quid: Or elſe Sanctification real, by giving Men a temporary Faith and other Graces proportionable, and their eſcaping the pollutions of the World by that Faith. But ſome think that by Sanctification is meant that cleanſing which immediately followed the Sacrifice (the word being uſed from the Jewiſh Sanctifyings;) and ſo by Sanctification, ſhould be meant that conditional juſtification, or cleanſing which all Men have immediately from Chriſt crucified before any further Perſonal application. And if this be ſo, then the Caſe is plain and paſt queſtion.

The 2d. Argument is from thoſe words [there remaineth no more Sacrifice for ſins, but, &c.] Here the Apoſtle proveth the uncurableneſs and deſperateneſs of their Caſe, in that there remaineth no more Sacrifice: And this is proper to them when they are Apoſtates. Now if there were never any Sacrifice for their Sins, then this reaſon will prove their caſe no more deſperate ſince their Apoſtacy than before; nor will it prove the Caſe of Apoſtates any more deſperate than the Caſe of all wicked Men for whom Chriſt died not. But that is contrary to the Text. It is either their own ſin or the Elects ſin, or ſome other Mens for whom the Apoſtle ſaith, there remaineth no more Sacrifice. If other Mens, then that proves not their p. 335caſe any more deſperate than it was: For a Sacrifice for other Mens ſins hinders not their Caſe from being deſperate before: Beſides, it is no loſs to them to loſe the Hopes of Life by ſuch a Sacrifice: For they could be no hopes. But it is mentioned here as their loſs, and the ſad conſequent of their Apoſtacy. If 100 Soldiers be taken Priſoners by the Enemy, and their former Prince ſhall Redeem 50 of them by a Ranſom, and when he hath done ſhall ſend to all the 100 to come to him, and be true Soldiers again; and hereupon they all come (though not all alike affected to him) and he tells them all [if ever you ſleep on your watch and ſo be taken by the Enemy again, or if you forſake my Colours and perfidiouſly turn to the Enemy, there remains no more Ranſom for you,] would not any Man wonder both how the 50 not ranſomed ſhould come out of Priſon at all? Or why the Prince ſhould tell them, There remained no more Ranſom for them when they were never ranſomed at all? Doubtleſs the Holy Ghoſt doth not pronounce theſe Apoſtates to be therefore miſerable, becauſe there remained no more Sacrifice for other Mens ſins: As if you ſhould ſay to a man in a Conſumption, There is now no hope of your Life, becauſe the Phyſitian hath given one effectual Receipt to your ſick Neighbor, and will give him no more.

But if it be acknowledged (as it muſt be) that the Text means, there is no more Sacrifice for the ſins of theſe Apoſtates; then it plainly intimates that there was once a Sacrifice for their ſin till they by Rejection, deprived themſelves of the benefit of it.

p. 336Obj. There was a Sacrifice ſufficient for their ſin before their Apoſtacy.

Anſ. 1. And was it not ſufficient materially after? Sure according to the opinion of the opponents it was.

2. If it were only ſufficient to have been a Sacrifice for them, but was not a Sacrifice for them at all, (which is their Senſe;) then their condition was as remedileſs before their Apoſtacy as after; and then this could be no part of their miſery procured by Apoſtacy.

3. The Apoſtle ſaith not [there remained no more ſufficiency for them in the Sacrifice] but [there remaineth no more Sacrifice.]

Obj. They did now fully diſcover that Chriſt died not for them, which was never diſcovered before; and therefore they are more miſerable.]

Anſ. Then all the inconvenience that Apoſtacy brought on them was but a diſcloſing of the truth (that they had never any remedy or Sacrifice for their ſin) a little ſooner than it ſhould elſe have been diſcloſed. But that's a far ſmaller matter than the Apoſtle intendeth. And then it ſhould rather be ſaid [there is no more ground left for falſe hopes and miſtakes: All this while you falſly thought Chriſt died for you, but now becauſe you have denied him, it is diſcloſed to you that he never died for you.] Indeed this Doctrine ſuits well with the Antinomian fancies, which make our love and obedience p. 337to Chriſt to have no more tendency to Salvation than as meer ſigns and duties.

2. The Text plainly intimates the contrary to what this objection affirmeth: For it ſaith not [there is no more falſe conceits of a Sacrifice for ſin] but [there is no more Sacrifice for ſins.]

Obj. It was before offered them by the Word and general conditional promiſe: But after their Apoſtacy it is offered them no more; and therefore it is ſaid, there is no more Sacrifice.

Anſ. 1. It cannot be offered to them, with a poſſibility of their acceptance or benefit, till it be firſt offered for them to the Father: That which is offered is [a Chriſt that hath redeemed us; with his benefits] A Chriſt that hath not redeemed or ranſomed us, is a gift that would not ſave us, if he were offered by God and accepted by us.

2. Indeed Chriſts Sacrifice for ſin was offered only to the Father, and is not at all offered to us. Chriſt himſelf is offered to us, but not as a Sacrifice, but as a Ranſomer, or one that was a Sacrifice offered to God for us, and now would be a Head and Husband to us. His benefits alſo by this Sacrifice merited are offered to us, but not the Sacrifice it ſelf.

Calvin on the Text ſaith thus [Hoſtiam ergo iis reſiduam eſſe negat qui a Chriſti morte diſcedunt; quod non fit particulari aliquo delicto, ſed abjecta in totum fide, &c. Nam quum mors Chriſti unicum ſit Remedium quo ab aeterna morte liberamur, qui vi… p. 338illius atque beneficium quantum in ſe eſt abolent, nonne digni ſunt quibus preter deſperationem nihil reliquum fiat? Qui in Chriſto manent, eas ad quotidianam reconciliationem Deus invitat: Quotidie irrigantur Chriſti ſanguine: Quotidie expiantur eorum peccata perpetuo ejus Sacrificio, ſi extra eam non eſt quaerenda ſalus, ne miremur omnes qui eum ſponte relinquent, omni ſpe veniae privari, &c. Eos igitur ſolos notat Apoſtolus qui Chriſtum impiè deferendo mortis ejus beneficio ſe privant.

Paraeus makes it to be the Apoſtacy it ſelf that had no Sacrifice, [ſi ab agnita veritate Evangelii ad judaicas hoſtias mali…ioſe relabantur, nulla eis reliqua ſit hoſtia pro foreign peccato expiando.] And comparing this Text with Heb 6 6. And ſhewing that they ſpeak of the ſame thing, he ſhews that this is the puniſhment of Apoſtates, that [there is no more Sacrifice for ſin.] But certainly if there were never any Sacrifice for their ſin at all, that could not be as a puniſhment for their Apoſtacy: Chriſt did not puniſh Mens Apoſtacy on the Croſs by not dying for them, Paraeus adds [Hoſtiam pro peccato intelligit expiatoriam propter quam Deus placatus remittat eis peccata. Negando hanc reliquam eſſe Apoſtatis, negat ſpem remiſſionis, veniae, gratiae aut ſalutis ullam eis ſupereſſe. Negando enim cauſam negat affectum: Quaeris cur nulla ſuperſit? Quia non eſt niſi unica Hoſtia peccatorum expiatrix, nempe Pontificis Chriſti hactenus ad longum demonſtrata: Hanc vero abjiciunt Apoſtatae. Nulla igitur alia eis eſt reliqua.) So that there was a Sacrifice remaining to them for their ſin, before their Apoſtacy.

p. 339Bullingar in loc. ſaith [Jam vero cum non ſit alia niſi una pro peccatis hoſtia, illi autem hanc unicam contemnant; certè aliam non invenient ullam.] Marlorat adds [talibus ergo contemptoribus nulla ſ…es veniae relinquitur] So that they had a Sacrifice for ſin till they Apoſtatiſed. So Dickson alſo in loc. Piſcator, and many more (for I will name none but who are known to be againſt univerſal Redemption, leſt their expoſition be rejected.) To all this I find no more objections of our opponents; but to the firſt argument which we draw hence they return many words. Which was, both from all thoſe benefits which here Apoſtates are ſaid to partake of, which only Chriſts Blood hath procured them, and ſpecially in that they are expreſly aſcribed to Chriſts Blood: for they are ſaid to have been ſanctified by the Blood of the Covenant:) Now to this they ſay (to give you the Senſe briefly: For if I ſhould recite and anſwer the maze of words which ſome here uſe, I ſhould provoke the Reader to throw away all in wearineſs or loathing.

1. This ſpeaks only of ſome that were profeſſors of the Faith of the Goſpel, ſeparated from the World, brought into the Church, &c. but theſe are not all Men.

Anſw. Grant that it is ſome Non-Elect, and it is as much as I deſire from this Text. And if that be granted, I think there is few would queſtion but that it is for all the Non-Elect in the Church that Chriſt died. And for thoſe that never heard of him (though I am paſt doubt that Chriſt ſatisfied for the ſins p. 340of all Mankind, yet) the uſe of the point is ſo ſmall, that I will not contend much about it with any.

2. They ſay [the Apoſtle doth neither declare what hath been, nor aſſert what may be, but only adds a commination upon a ſuppoſition of a thing, &c.]

Anſ. This I anſwered before. I'll ſtand to the Judgment of almoſt any learned Expoſitor on this Text, though againſt Univerſal Redemption. See Calvin, Beza, Paraeus, Piſcator, Perkins, Dickſon, Bullinger, &c.

3. They ſay [It is certain that theſe Men made profeſſion of all theſe things, &c. and therefore the open renouncing them was a ſin ſo hainous as deſerved all this Commination, though the Apoſtates themſelves had never intereſt in Chriſts Blood.

Anſw. What's this to the point? The Text ſaith, they were ſanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, and not only they profeſſed that they were.

4. They ſay [it was the manner of the Saints and Apoſtles themſelves to eſteem of all baptiſed initiated perſons, ingrafted into the Church as ſanctified perſons: So that ſpeaking of Backſliders, he could not make mention of them any otherwiſe, than as they were commonly eſteemed to be, and at that time in the Judgment of charity were to be conſidered, &c.]

p. 341Anſw. 1. How much doth it differ from the language of Men when they are pleading for Separation? Then they cannot endure to hear that all the baptiſed are called Saints by the Apoſtles and Churches.

2. Indeed only thoſe are ſo called that ſeem probably to be ſo.

3. And therefore what is this to them that by Apoſtacy into a remedileſs miſery, ſhew themſelves not to be ſo. The Apoſtles will not encourage known falſhood in the Speeches or Opinions of others, much leſs be the Authors of it, and lead them into it; doth the Apoſtle here pronounce their Caſe hopeleſs and remedileſs, and tell them there is no Sacrifice for their ſin but a fearful looking for of Judgment, &c? and doth he at the ſame time perſwade People to believe, that they were ſanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, &c. if it were not true? Even then when it openly diſcovereth it ſelf falſe or is ſuppoſed ſo to do?

5. They ſay] if the Text be interpreted poſitively and according to the truth of the thing it ſelf in both parts thereof, viz.

1. That theſe of whom the Apoſtle ſpeaketh were truly ſanctified.

2. That ſuch may totally periſh, then theſe two things will follow;

1. That faith and Sanctification is not the Fruit of Election.

2. That Believers may fall finally from Chriſt.

Anſw. 1. Theſe were truly ſanctified, though not with that Sanctification which is proper to the Elect and ſaved.

p. 3422. No doubt ſuch may and do fall away and periſh. He that denieth this muſt deny to believe Chriſt, who hath expreſly affirmed it in Mat. 13. That they in whom the Word is not deeply rooted do believe for a while, and in the time of temptation or perſecution fall away. What elſe is our diſtinction between Temporary Faith and ſaving?

3. When common Faith and Sanctification is antecedent to ſpecial Faith and Sanctification, and ſo found in the Elect, it is then a Fruit of Election: But when it is found in others, it is no Fruit of Election. And why ſhould they wonder at that, who deny it to be a Fruit of Satisfaction or Ranſom, which is a more Univerſal cauſe then Election is?

6. They further ſay [there is nothing in the Text to perſwade that the Perſons here ſpoken of, muſt needs be truly juſtified and regenerated Believers, much leſs that Chriſt died for them, &c.]

Anſw. 1. That they were illuminated, and partakers of the Holy Ghoſt, and ſanctified by Chriſts Blood the Text ſpeaks without ſtrained conſequence: (with Heb. 6. 6. But that they had true ſpecial ſaving Faith, Regeneration or Sanctification, I affirm not. Yet was it true.

2. Is it a ſtrained conſequence to conclude,

1. That he who by Apoſtacy is fallen into that miſery which he was never in before, and other ſinners are not in, that now there is no more Sacrifice for his ſin, had before a Sacrifice? And ſo have other ſinners that be not fallen ſo far as he is?

p. 3432. Or that he who is ſanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, was one whoſe ſins cauſed that Blood? and for whom it was ſhed? If you had proved that it ſanctifieth thoſe for whom it was never ſhed, then you had done ſomething; ſo much for this Text. I had thought to have anſwered all the objections of the contrary-minded which the Books at hand afford; but I ſhall do far leſs than I thought to do in it, as finding that they are ſo diſordered, wordy and weak, in many, that I ſhall but fill Paper with needleſs Lines, and be tedious and ungrateful to the judicious Readers.

The 8th. Text which I will inſiſt on is Matth. 22. 2, 3, 4, 12, 13. The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a certain King, which made a Marriage for his Son, and ſent forth his Servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding, and they would not come: And he ſent forth other Servants, ſaying, Tell them that were bidden, ſaying, Behold, I have prepared my Dinner, My Oxen and my Fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: Come unto the Marriage, &c. Then ſaid he to his Servants, the Wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy, So 12. 13.

Here it is agreed on that God is the King: The Wedding feaſt, is Chriſt and the benefits of his Death offered by the Goſpel. The killing of the Fatling moſt ſay, doth intimate the killing of Chriſt that he may be to us the Bread of Life, and his Fleſh Meat indeed, and his Blood Drink indeed. The Meſſengers are Preachers: The meſſage is the Goſpel Invitation or Offer. Hence therefore I thus argue; p. 344If all the things are ready before hand which upon coming in to Chriſt are to be received, yea and ready for thoſe that refuſed to come, and only their not coming, or not coming preparedly do hinder their participation, then Chriſt was a Sacrifice made ready even for all that refuſed to come. But, &c. Ergo, &c.

I mean not that Chriſt was appointed to ſave final refuſers conſidered as ſuch: But he was a Sacrifice for all the Sins of the ſame Men, except their final refuſal, and thereby made ready for them all thoſe ſaving benefits, which upon coming in they were to receive. This meſſage any Miniſter of the Goſpel may now deliver to unbelievers: Come in to Chriſt; accept him as a Redeemer, Lord and Saviour, and with him pardon and Salvation; for all this is ready: All that is prerequiſite to believing or coming in, is done by Chriſt, as far as concerned him as a Sacrifice and a Donor of his Teſtamentory benefits; and as far as unſatisfied Juſtice did require: All things that are requiſite objectively to your believing are ready. Now this could not be a truth; if Chriſt had not been a Sacrifice for theſe Mens Sins: For how is all ready when the very firſt and moſt needful thing is unready, that is, an expiatory Sacrifice for ſin? When ſatisfaction to juſtice is unready? Can they make this? Or are they called to make it? Or would their coming in make it, which was not before made? Or would coming in ſerve turn without ſatisfaction? Rather it ſhould be ſaid to them (as to the Devils) come not, for nothing is ready. For where Chriſt is not ready, and ſatisfaction for ſin not ready, there p. 345nothing is ready which a ſinner is called to by the Goſpel. The Cauſe being wanting, all the Effects muſt needs be wanting.

Obj. All may be ſaid to be ready, in that Chriſts Death is ſufficient for All.

Anſ. That's true; and I deſire no more; if you underſtand it as Divines have hitherto done, and as this Text proves it; that is, that it is a ſufficient Ranſom, Sacrifice, Price, Satisfaction for all. But then this implieth that it is a Ranſom, Sacrifice, &c. for All. But according to the new futile evaſion, it is falſe, viz. that Chriſts Death was only ſufficient to have been a Sacrifice or Ranſom for All, if God or Chriſt had ſo been willing: but indeed was no Ranſom for them at all. For is this making all ready? Is Chriſt any readier for thoſe he died not for, than for the Devils? or than if he had never died at all? VVill you ſend to a Priſoner and ſay, I have paid 1000 l. for thy fellow Priſoner that owed but 500 l. the ſum is ſufficient to have diſcharged thy debt too, if I had ever intended it, therefore come and receive a diſcharge, for all is ready? Or will you bid your Servant go to all the Town and ſay, I have killed and dreſſed meat enough for you all, reſolving that ſome of you ſhall never taſt of it on any conditions, therefore come now and partake of it all, for all things are ready? The Readineſs that Chriſt ſpeaks of here is ſuch, as ſuppoſeth all things to be ready except receiving by Faith: nothing but coming is wanting.

p. 346Obj. But Faith it ſelf is not ready, therefore Chriſt died not for them.

Anſ. A falſe conſequence which yet bears the whole fabrick of the oppoſers Cauſe.

1. Doth not the Text plainly diſtinguiſh here between Faith and all the Benefits that by Faith we are partakers of? Doth it not plainly ſay, that all things (elſe) are ready; when yet Faith in them was unready, for they would not? But the Invitation was come, for all things are ready▪ what a ſilly cavil would men put into the mouths of the invited, teaching them to ſay, my coming is not ready; therefore all things are not ready: nay nothing is made ready for me. This Text expreſly diſtinguiſheth between all other things, and coming: and ſo ſhews, that when men will not come, yet all things were ready, and nothing but Faith was wanting to their participation. And therefore Chriſt may be a Sacrifice made ready for thoſe, that have not Faith, and therefore receive him not.

2. And you might ſee ſome of the reaſon of this in the Text: The King in one Relation prepares the feaſt: and in a further invites his Gueſts: and in a further compels them to come in; God and the Redeemer as preparer of the feaſt, (which is 1. By ſatisfying Juſtice. 2. By enacting the New Law) have made all things ready. But to give Faith belongeth not to him in either of theſe reſpects.

2. God and Chriſt as the Inviter of his Gueſts, doth all things requiſite to the invited.

p. 3473. But God as one that reſolveth de Eventu, what particular perſons ſhall be compelled to come in, gives that Faith, or ſo compels them. Faith follows this compelling (which, ſay Interpreters truly and generally, is an importunate prevailing perſuaſion) Now may not God

1. Make Chriſt a Sacrifice for all, ready?

2. And by Legiſlation or conditional Donation, make a free gift of Chriſt to all that will have him?

3. And invite multitudes that will refuſe; and yet compel but his choſen only to come in? Here it is that ſpecial differencing Grace begins, in the execution; and it confoundeth men in the whole body of Theology when they will needs ſuppoſe it to begin where it doth not, that is, in Redemption by Sacrifice. All men ſhall one day confeſs, all things were ready: if I would have come in I had been ſaved: it was my own wilful refuſal that deprived me.

Obj. But why doth not God compel all to come in as well as ſome?

Anſ. 1. O man! who art thou that diſputeſt againſt God? May he not do with his own as he liſt? He compelleth ſome from the ſuperabundance of his Mercy: He inviteth the reſt in great mercy alſo.

2. This will be no excuſe to the refuſers: what if God had only invited all, and compelled none? What if he had ſuffered all to periſh in their wilfulneſs? would that have been any eaſe to any? and if he compel ſome, is that any wrong to the reſt? will not Conſcience ſay another p. 348day, I periſh juſtly, that would not be ſaved? muſt I need compulſion to accept of a Redeemer and Salvation with him?

Obj. But it is not in my Power to come: I cannot.

Anſ. There's no man that would come that can ſay ſo: if you will you can; yea you do come. If you will not, who will you blame but your ſelf, you may come if you will. As your will-not may be called a cannot, ſo it's true, you cannot: your cannot and will-not is all one. As for thoſe men that open their mouths againſt the moſt High, and ſay, that [if God give not willingneſs and faith to men, he doth but delude them to tell them that Chriſt died for them, and to give them Chriſt, if they will.] I intreat them to conſider,

1. God hath laid the cauſe of mens perdition on their own will, ſtill in his word, and will do at Judgment.

2. God hath taught all men naturally to accuſe themſelves when their wilfulneſs was the cauſe.

3. The light of Nature teacheth all Nations under Heaven to lay the blame on the wilful, and to make all their Laws, and execute all their Judgments on that ground; acquitting men ſo far as they can be diſcovered to have been forced and involuntary, excuſing him that can ſay [I did it againſt my Will] condemning thoſe that did it willingly: Deny this therefore and you deny, 1. The Law of God in Scripture. 2. The Law of natural Conſcience. 3. And p. 349overthrow all Laws of Nature and Nations, and all Churches and Commonwealths. Did ever any ſober Prince ſay, I will not condemn a man for wilful Murther, becauſe he hath not free-will, nor power to forbear it, except God give it him? Or did ever wiſe Judge abſolve an offender on that ground? If a VVhore-monger or Drunkard ſo accuſtom themſelves to thoſe ſins that they have contracted a habit, and cannot forbear them, did ever any Law-giver, Judge or Wiſe man, take that for an excuſe? Or rather for the moſt hainous aggravation of his fault? God and Nature hath taught all men, in their enquiries after the cauſe of ſin, to ſtop at mans Will and lay the blame there. In intreat wiſe godly men therefore, that they would not ſhut the very eyes of Nature it ſelf, and overthrow all order of things for their by-conceits; and when they have done to fly in Gods Face with ſuch horrid deſperate unreverence and preſumption, as to ſay, God deceives and deludes men, if he give a Ranſom for them, and give them Chriſt and Pardon on condition of their willingneſs, except he alſo make them willing. I have before ſhewed it (without any participation with Pelagius) that all men that periſh do ſuffer for abuſe of Grace, ſufficient to its immediate uſe and end: and if God will not ſuffer all ſo to periſh, but compel ſome to come in, when he doth but invite others; our Eye muſt not be evil becauſe he is good. He deals mercifully with all, but more mercifully with ſome: thoſe therefore ſhall for ever glorifie his Mercy, and the reſt be p. 350left without all juſt excuſe, and be ſpeechleſs.

The 9th Text is Mat. 18. 27, 32, 34, 35. Then the Lord of that Servant was moved with compaſſion and looſed him and forgave him the Debt. &c. Then his Lord after that he had called him ſaid unto him: O thou wicked Servant, I forgave thee all that debt becauſe thou deſiredſt me: ſhouldſt not thou alſo have had compaſſion on thy fellow Servant, even as I had pity on thee? And his Lord was wroth and delivered him to the Tormentors till he ſhould pay all that was due unto him. So likewiſe ſhall my Heavenly Father do alſo to you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his Brother their treſpaſſes. Here it's plainly ſaid by Chriſt himſelf, that the debt was forgiven him, who afterward periſhed. Whence I argue ab offectu ad cauſam, therefore Chriſt died for him. For without Blood there is no remiſſion.

Two things are ſaid againſt this. 1. That Theologia parabolica non eſt Argumentativ….

Anſ. And I am ſure that Chriſt's Theology is not deluſory or falſe. If he taught by Parables, then his Parables were and are teaching; and if teaching, then we may argue from them. But conſider, though it's certain that nothing in Parables is to be ſtretched beyond the intent, yet this is the plain ſenſe and intent; Chriſt ſhewing that thoſe that have received mercy for their own ſins, muſt forgive others, or elſe they ſhall periſh as ungrateful for what they had received, and as unmerciful to others.

1. It is twice over expreſly ſaid that, [he forgave him the Debt.]

p. 3512. The effect followed, he looſed him, viz. from Priſon.

3. It is the aggravation of his following ſin, to be ungrateful for his own pardon; and there is no ingratitude poſſible, if it had not been true that he received that mercy himſelf.

4. Chriſt expreſly openeth and applieth all this to his own Diſciples, ſaying, ſo alſo will my Heavenly Father do to you, if you from your Hearts forgive not, &c. ſo that it is paſt doubt that this forgiveneſs was real.

2. The other objection is this: Thoſe that are forgiven never fall away or periſh: and therefore this parable is not ſo to be underſtood.

Anſ. The text ſaith plainly, the debt was forgiven: and therefore it is certainly true. There is a fourfold forgiveneſs of ſin; which I deſire may be well obſerved. Firſt, upon Chriſts undertaking to ſuffer, and ſo his moral ſatisfying, God the Father as the offended Legiſlator of the Law of Nature, remitted his right of puniſhing and advantage of honouring his Juſtice, meerly on that ground, and in that Relation; ſuſpending the obligation of that Law, and delivering up the ſinner and all his Debts into the full power or hands of him that Redeemed him, giving him authority to give remiſſion to whom he pleaſed on terms of Grace: ſo that as Chriſt and not man did ſatisfie Juſtice; ſo it ſeemed moſt meet to the Wiſdom of God, that Chriſt and not man himſelf ſhould be the firſt receiver of the pardon and other benefits: but with this difference.

p. 3521. Chriſt receiveth them eminenter in poteſtate conferendi, as he hath power to confer them on the Redeemed: But we receive them from Chriſt formaliter, in themſelves.

2. Chriſt receiveth them for our good; It is not the pardon of any ſins of his own that he receiveth. But we receive them for our own good. So that God hath given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son: and he that hath the Son hath life: God hath put a Pardon for us into Chriſts hands, in giving him this Power: and Chriſt muſt be the conveyer to us, in the exerciſe of his Power, For as the Father Judgeth no man, but hath committed all Judgment to the Son; ſo he Abſolveth no man, but hath committed all Abſolution to the Son: For Abſolution is one half of Judgment. That is, God as the Rector according to the meer Law of Nature, and as meer Creator, on the firſt ground judgeth no man: But now he judgeth all as Redeemer on terms of Mercy, by him that Redeemed us; and ſo Abſolveth.

So then the firſt pardon of ſin, was in Potentia Remittendi, virtual, put into the hand of Chriſt only, for his Sacrifice and Satisfaction; and not to the ſinner immediately himſelf.

2. The ſecond Pardon, is by Chriſt thus Authorized: and it is by him as Donor, Teſtator or Legiſlator of the new Law: and it is, [A Grant of Remiſſion of ſins to All men, on condition, they will accept him and pardon with him] ſo that this is Chriſts firſt pardoning act and this is but a conditional pardon, and therefore is not yet full, and actual.

p. 3533. The third Pardon of ſin, Is Chriſts actual Pardon upon the performance of the condition: which is not by any new phyſical act, but by a new moral act of the former Law or Grant; which till now was ſuſpended, upon the nonperformance of the condition: it being the Will of the Legiſlator or Donor, that his Inſtrument ſhould not act or remit ſin till men believe.

4 The fourth Pardon and moſt full, is that by the abſolving Sentence at Judgment, by Chriſt as Judge when our ſins ſhall be blotted out, when that time of refreſhing comes, as the Apoſtle ſpeaks Act. 3. Theſe four are ſeveral acts tending to the full perfecting of our Pardon and Juſtification, and are all called Pardon, and muſt all proceed in this order one after another.

Moreover the third of theſe, or the propereſt remiſſion in this life, is of divers ſorts or degrees, according to the Termini à quibus. the divers ſins or penalties Remitted: As is the ſecond alſo. From thence therefore we muſt next diſtinguiſh of Remiſſion, as we did before from the nature of the remitting act: For the word [Remiſſion] of ſin, ſignifieth the Diſſolution of the Obligation to Puniſhment; and ſo doth conſtitutive Juſtification too: But the term Juſtification reſpecteth more ſtrongly [the obligation] diſſolved; and the word [Remiſſion] more ſtrongly reſpecteth [the Puniſhment] to which we were obliged; not that Remiſſion doth only reſpect the Puniſhment (as ſome miſtake) and not the obligation at all; but it chiefly reſpecteth the Puniſhment. And therefore p. 354it is both Obligationis Relaxatio vel Remiſſio, & Poenae Remiſſio, but moſt properly and principally the laſt. And therefore it is a right diſtribution of Remiſſion, which is taken from the diverſity of the Penalties remitted.

Let us therefore Firſt diſtinguiſh of Puniſhment that we may the better diſtinguiſh of Remiſſion. And before that let us define Puniſhment.

Puniſhment Actually taken, Punitio, is. The Action of a Governour depriving an Inferiour of ſome natural good, becauſe of ſome fault by him committed (or becauſe of ſome Moral Evil.)

Puniſhment Paſſively taken, Poena is a privavation of ſome natural good, Inflicted for the deſert of ſome Moral Evil.

The Matter of Puniſhment is Natural Evil: and therefore the firſt thing intended by the Inflicter is, ut noceat patienti; that it may hurt the Sufferer, and ſo may have the Matter of Puniſhment. The form, is its Relation to a fault, viz. that it be [becauſe of ſome Moral Evil:] The end is [the demonſtration of Juſtice] this end enters the difinition of Puniſhment in General, and is common to all Puniſhment. The other ends proper to each Species, are to be fetcht from the definition of that Species.

And firſt quoad Materiam Puniſhment is of two ſorts.

1. Some Puniſhment is deſtructive to the ſinner: and ſome is leſſer, conſiſting in the removal of ſuch good, whoſe loſs is tolerable.

p. 3552. Quoad finem, ſome puniſhment is for the Demonſtration of Juſtice moſt eminently and principally; and that is either

1. When there is all Juſtice in…utmoſt Rigour, and no remitting mercy.

2. Or when the remitting mercy is ſmall comparatively, and Juſtice is moſt eminently demonſtrated.

2. Some Puniſhment is for the demonſtration of Juſtice conjunct with a far greater and more eminent demonſtration of Mercy. This is commonly called [Chaſtiſement] yea, [Paternal Chaſtiſement] becauſe of tenderneſs and Love that accompanieth it; though indeed it is common to a Maſter, a Prince, or any Rector to Chaſtiſe, as well as a Father. God puniſheth in this ſort.

I. Rebels, or Unbelievers.

1. To Reſtrain them.

2. To Reclaim them.

1. From Total Rebellion.

2. From a ſeeming Religiouſneſs, or half Chriſtianity, to Sincerity.

3. From particular Sins.

II. True Believers, his Adopted Sons.

1. To weaken their Corrupt Inclinations, and ſtrengthen their Holy Inclinations.

2. To raiſe them from particular falls, and excite particular Graces into lively exerciſe.

3. Remotely.

1. To fit them for great Works.

2. To fit them for greater Glory hereafter.

3. To Glorifie his Power and Grace in their ſuſtentation, and deliverance.

4. But ſtill the end of Puniſhment as ſuch, p. 356or of the Evil that is in it, is the demonſtration of Juſtice in ſome meaſure, however moderated and prevailed over by Mercy; even Fathers Chaſtiſe their Children in Paternal Juſtice, but with a prevailing Love; and Vindictive it is, though not in that rigorous Senſe, as the firſt mentioned ſort of puniſhment is Vindictive.

And as Remiſſion muſt be diſtinguiſhed according to the diverſity of the penalty remitted, ſo alſo in reſpect of the ſins remitted. (Though to remit Sin, and to remit puniſhment is all one) for it is,

1. Either the whole general Maſs of Sin paſt, and preſent, habitual, and actual, (beſides Original imputed Sin) which is remitted at once, (which is at our firſt Repenting and Believing ſincerely.) This is called Univerſal Remiſſion, or Juſtification: Or elſe

2. It is particular ſins of Act, Omiſſion, or Habit, that are remitted to one who had all the ſins of his Unregenerate State pardoned before, and was diſpoſed to this Actual, as being Habitually Penitent, and Believing. This is commonly called Particular Remiſſion, or Juſtification.

Alſo in regard of the obligation, diſſolved remiſſion muſt be diſtinguiſhed: For it is either the penalty of the Law of Works (which is remitted to all Believers.)

2. Or the Penalty of the Law of Chriſt (which it obligeth men to for non-performance of the Conditions of the Law,) which is remitted to no man; ſome who ſay the Law of works is totally abrogated, do call this laſt [the peremptory p. 357ſentence of Chriſt's Law] as diſtinct from the former, which they call [the remiſſible ſentence of Chriſt's Law,] but all comes to one in ſenſe.

Moreover, Remiſſion muſt be diſtinguiſhed quoad jus ipſum, or its very form Into.

1. Inceptive, or Remiſſion given at firſt.

2. And Continuate, or Remiſſion confirmed and continued; (which requireth a continued moral action of the remitting Law or Grant, and more than the continuance of our Faith, which was the Condition of inceptive Remiſſion, viz. The addition of ſincere obedience, and the continuance thereof.

By all this it may appear that remiſſion of ſin is variouſly diſtinguiſhable, and not to be taken in one and the ſame ſenſe wherever we find the word in Scripture.

And becauſe I have run ſo far in diſtinguiſhing, I will add ſome Concluſions in application of them.

Concluſ. 1. In the firſt remitting act (wherein God ſo far remitteth ſin as to let go his Jus Puniendi, as Rector ſecundum legem operum meerly, and giveth up all into the hands of the Redeemer, to give out remiſſion as he pleaſe on terms of Grace) in this act, I ſay God doth remit all the ſins of all mankind, as they are againſt the Law of works. Of this are meant thoſe Scriptures which ſay [Chriſt having purged away our ſins, aſcended, &c.] Heb. 1. 3. And that he took away the ſins of the World, and that God was in Chriſt reconciling the World to himſelf, not imputing to them their iniquities, &c. 2 Cor. 5. 19, 20.

p. 358Concl. 2. In the ſecond remitting act (by which Chriſt firſt gives out pardon according to the power given him) Chriſt the Redeemer and the Father by him, doth forgive conditionally all ſins to all men, except what the very nature of the Condition excepteth, viz. The Non-performance of the ſaid Condition.

Concl. 3. Neither of theſe Acts, or any following, do remit the proper, viz. final non-performance of the Conditions of remiſſion.

Concl. 4. In the third act, Chriſt doth actually remit to every true Believer all the deſtructive Penalty of all his ſins paſt or preſent, and all that Penalty whatſoever which proceedeth from the intention of demonſtrating Juſtice above Mercy, or prevailing or rigorous Juſtice, commonly called vindictive in a more rigid reſtrained ſenſe.

Concl. 5. It is not only the Eternal puniſhment, but all the temporal puniſhment which is of the fore-deſcribed Nature, which Chriſt remitteth to every Believer.

Concl. 6. At the ſame time he diſpoſeth him to the daily receiving of a daily pardon for daily ſins, both in that his former ſins being all pardoned, his perſon is Accepted and Adopted, and his Soul habituated to that Faith and Repentance which is the Condition, and poſſeſſed of the Spirit, which maintaineth theſe Graces.

Concl. 7. Yet are not his ſins actually pardoned before they are committed.

Concl. 8. Inceptive Remiſſion is actual, and equal to abſolute (as to the preſent poſſeſſion of it) as ſoon as men believe; but as to the continuance of it, both Univerſal and particular Remiſſion, p. 359are ſtill but Conditional till death, and the Condition of Continuance (as is beforeſaid) is more than the Condition of our firſt obtaining.

Concl. 9. That Men loſe not Juſtification or Remiſſion, therefore comes not from the Nature of the thing, nor the Tenor of the Remitting-Grant, which being Conditional, ſuppoſeth ever the poſſibility of the Non-performance of the Condition: (alas, more than poſſibility,) but it comes from the good pleaſure of God to maintain that Grace in his Elect which he hath given them, ſo far as to ſee infallibly that they perform the Condition of continued and renewed Remiſſion and Juſtification, by cauſing them to perſevere, and overcome, and therefore God as Legiſlator (in Precepts, Prohibitions, Threats, and Rewarding Promiſes) doth ſtill deal with all Men as defectible, and ſuppoſeth the poſſibility of their falling away from Grace, and periſhing. But God as Eternal Elector, and Determiner▪ of Events by his Decrees, dealeth with all his Elect as Men whom he reſolveth infallibly to Save, and whoſe Apoſtacy is, though poſſible, yet non futura, a thing that never ſhall be; yea, in reſpect to the power of any Enemy to deceive them by overcoming God's preſerving grace; ſo the deceiving or perverting of them is properly impoſſible, as well as not future (as Chriſt himſelf tells us.)

Concl. 10. It is evident therefore that Remiſſion and Juſtification are not perfect in this lifie, both in that many ſins are ſtill behind to be remitted, and from whoſe guilt a particular Juſtfication is neceſſary to be added; and alſo becauſe p. 360the very continuance of the Juſtification and Remiſſion received is but Conditional; and a Conditional Grant is not ſo perfect as an abſolute, or when the Condition is all performed.

Concl. 11. That puniſhment which man was ſentenced to Gen. 3. after his fall, and the Redeemer inflicteth in this Life on merciful terms (where there is a greater demonſtration of mercy, than vindictive Juſtice, which is commonly called corrective puniſhment or chaſtiſement,) is never wholly remitted to any, even of the Elect themſelves in this Life. All Men muſt eat their bread in ſorrow, and be ſick and dye, and the Earth is ſtill curſed with barrenneſs for our ſakes, and the remnants of God's frowns, and want of Communion with him, and want of more Grace and Spirit from him, and of mortification of our Sins, are all ſad puniſhments which the Elect muſt here undergo. As for thoſe that ſay that none of theſe are puniſhments, I have elſewhere confuted them at large.

1. They contradict expreſs Scripture.

2. And Orthodox Divines.

3. They underſtand not the definition of Puniſhment, elſe would they know that Chaſtiſement is a Species of it. Nor is it true that they ſay, that God hath taken away all the evil of Affliction, but only he hath taken away the Deſtructive Evil, and introduced or added a greater prevailing good, which yet this Evil muſt (and that but by accident) produce. It is eſſentially quoad materiam, malum naturale ſtill; & quoad formam it is propter malum morale. So that quoad Receptionem peccatoris patientis, as to our Reception, Remiſſion of Sin is not omnibus p. 361numeris perfect in this Life, there being ſtill ſome unforgiven Puniſhment to be ſuffered here.

Hence you may ſee how to judge of the Controverſie ſo much agitated between us and the Papiſts, Utrum Remiſſd Culpa remaneat poena temporalis? Whether Temporal Puniſhment remain when the Sin is forgiven: (And how indiſtinctly that queſtion is commonly handled; etiam per magni nominis Theologos (Detur Venia cenſurae neceſſariae.)

As merciful corrective Puniſhment is not all remitted in this Life, to any of the Elect, ſo Sin it ſelf is to them ſo far unremitted, as the puniſhment is unremitted. I weigh not the Clamours that ſome will make againſt this Aſſertion, who uſe more zealouſly to aſſert the Dictates of their Leaders, than the words of God; and to ſearch and learn what the Orthodox ſay, than what God ſaith, or the Nature of the thing containeth. Hear the Scripture, Lam. 3. 42. [We have▪ tranſgreſſed, we have Rebelled, thou haſt not pardoned.] This was ſpoken by the Prophet in his own name, and the name of all God's People, the Jews, becauſe of their Temporal Sufferings.

Abundance of the like importance might be cited from Scripture, but this is not the place. Methinks thoſe Antinomians ſhould not be againſt this Doctrine, who (falſly) teach, that that it is only Temporal Puniſhment or Chaſtiſement that Believers Pray againſt, when they daily Pray, forgive us our Treſpaſſes (as the moſt moderate of their Books do affirm.

p. 362Concl. 12. This imperfection in Remiſſion of Sin here, comes not from any deficiency in Gods Love, or Chriſts ſatisfaction, but from God's Wiſdom (in the right giving out of his Mercies) and Man's State, and the nature of the work. Yea, in ſenſu activo, in reſpect of God as meer Legiſlator of the Law of Works, Remiſſion may be ſaid to be perfect; that is, quantum in ſe in illa Relatione, he hath perfectly pardoned it, by quitting all his right of puniſhing, into the hands of the ſatisfier. From whom he receives, to him he delivereth. But Chriſt ſeeth it meet to give it out to us on Conditions, and by Degrees; and we are not at the higheſt Degree 'till the end of all, at Judgment; (even the Remiſſion it ſelf, and not only the manifeſtation is thus given by Degrees.) And ſo it may be longer coming to us, and be ſtill paſſively imperfect through our incapacity. As a King receiving a Ranſom for a Priſoner, may agree when all the Ranſom is paid, that yet he ſhall be delivered but by Degrees, or upon Conditions.

Concl. 13. Yet ſome and many Degrees of the foreſaid Corrective Temporal Puniſhment are remiſſible, and Chriſt hath Conditionally promiſed to remit them in this Life.

He having now the inflicting of all Puniſhment committed to him (John 5. 22.) hath threatned more in his new Law to ſome (yet diſobedient) than to others; and promiſed more forbearance and tender dealing to ſome than to others.

Concl. 14. But this is not by ſo Univerſal and unreſerved a promiſe, as the Remiſſion of p. 363Deſtructive puniſhment, and as Salvation is given by: But it is by a Promiſe with Exception or Reſerve: As if Chriſt ſhould ſay, [Ordinarily you may expect to ſmart moſt, when you ſin moſt, and to be remitted and eaſed moſt, (Conſideratis Conſiderandis, taking one thing with another) when you pleaſe me beſt: But yet I reſerve my Jus Dominii, yea, and power of puniſhing even the beſt, as ſhall ſeem meet to my wiſdom, for publick good, or prevention of Sin not yet committed, or manifeſting my Wiſdom, or Power, or Goodneſs, &c.] So that mark here;

1. That ſtill this is puniſhment, and for Sin, (if we had nothing but Original Sin) when it is abſolutely conſidered, why God puniſheth the beſt; it is for ſin. But when it is asked comparatively, why he puniſheth Job more than another, it is not for Sin, and therefore in the Comparative Senſe, that is, oft rather to be called Affliction, Perſecution, (as from Men) Tribulation, &c. which in the Abſolute ſenſe, muſt ſtill be called Chaſtiſement, or Puniſhment.

2. Mark that this Goſpel Promiſe of Mercy, and remiſſion of Temporal Corrective Puniſhment in part, is properly a Conditional Promiſe as it reſpecteth God's ordinary dealing with Men, but it is not an infallible aſcertaining Promiſe as to this or that particular Perſon, though they do perform the Condition: becauſe (as is ſaid) it hath, beſides the Condition on our part, certain Exceptions and Reſerves on Chriſt's part; (from hence you may ſee how to anſwer the Queſtion, whether we muſt pray for temporal p. 364Deliverances, Abſolutely, or Conditionally.

Concl. 15. As all Puniſhments on the Elect before Converſion (while yet God hateth them as Workers of Iniquity, and they are Children of wrath) are not of the firſt ſort (in demonſtration of prevailing Rigorous Juſtice) but moſt commonly Merciful Chaſtiſements, (for they are oft the happy occaſions of their Converſion, yea, powerful means thereto:) So the like muſt be ſaid of the Non-Elect themſelves, who are but in the ſame ſtate, even they are the ſubjects of tender Chaſtiſement, and in a gracious ſenſe God is oft called their Father in Scripture, tho' not in that ſpecial ſtricteſt ſenſe as he is the Father of the Adopted, as not giving them that ſpecial Grace, but common only. The Reaſon is, becauſe though God have unequal Intentions de eventu, in Chaſtiſing the Elect, and the Non-Elect, yet

1. He doth demonſtrate more Mercy than Rigorous Vindictive Juſtice even in the puniſhments of the Non-Elect, and therefore their Puniſhments are ſuch Chaſtiſements.

(Proved 1. Elſe they ſhould not be guilty and accuſable for loſing the Fruit of merciful Corrections, when indeed it is a main mercy that they ſhall periſh for not improving.

2. Elſe God would not make it the matter of a threatning to correct them or ſmite them no more (that is in that ſort) becauſe they revolt more and more, which yet he doth, Ergo, &c.

2. Puniſhment being the Action of a Rector as ſuch, and not of Dominus Abſolutus, an Owner as ſuch, (and ſo not formally and directly the p. 365act of God, as determining of events by his ſecret Decrees,) therefore they are to be ſpecified and denominated from Rectoral ends, (which I call the ends of God's Legiſlative Will) rather than from the ends of God's Secret Decrees de rerum eventu.

Concl. 16. Hence it follows, that God may and doth remit much Temporal Puniſhment (both deſtructive and corrective,) even to the unregenerate (both Elect, and Non-Elect) taking an eaſier way to give the ſame mercy, which elſe he might have given in a ſharper way; and ſo far he may be ſaid to remit or forgive their ſins: Though yet the Deſtructive Eternal Puniſhment being not forgiven, it is not fit in ordinary Speech to ſay, that ſuch mens Sins are forgiven, without a limiting reſtrictive explication, becauſe they are forgiven only ſecundum quid, and in the weakeſt Senſe.

I have on occaſion of this Text run quite beyond my firſt intentions in opening the nature and ſorts of remiſſion, but yet I hope not unprofitably.

From all this now it may appear, that as there are ſeveral ſorts of Remiſſion, ſo divers of them are Reverſible and common to thoſe that periſh for ever. And now to the Text in hand.

1. It is apparent that this Text ſpeaks of ſome of theſe ſorts of Remiſſion.

2. And that it ſpeaks of a Remiſſion reverſible, or which may be conferr'd on thoſe that afterward periſh. And though I preſume not to determine which of them it is that is here meant, yet

p. 3663. It is certain that which ever it be, it is the fruit of Chriſts blood ſhed for them to whom it is given, for without blood there is no Remiſſion. The Law of Works remitteth not, for it relaxeth not its own obligation. And God relaxeth it not but upon ſatisfaction, as a valuable Conſideration. And therefore it is relaxed by the New Teſtament in the blood of Chriſt, for that Teſtament is founded in his blood. But for the ſenſe of the Text, I judge that the Forgiveneſs there mentioned, is the ſecond and third ſort; that is, the Conditional Univerſal Grant of Pardon by the New Covenant; (for the Covenant is the ſame in its Tenour to Unbelievers, and Believers; there is no real change in it when men believe, only the ſame inſtrument doth then morally act, that is, actually remit ſin, which before it did not, becauſe it was ſuſpended on a Condition which was not performed. But Chriſt hath done his part as Teſtator, Donor, and Legiſlator before in making the Grant.) And ſo it is applicable differently to different Perſons. To thoſe that have only the Conditional Remiſſion, and have not yet performed the Condition; it tells them eventually what ſhall be their miſerable caſe if they do not perform it (which too oft comes to paſs.) To them that do believe, and ſo are inceptively Juſtified and Pardoned, Chriſt ſpeaks as a Legiſlator and Teacher, ſuppoſing the poſſibility o… their not performing the Condition of the Continuance of Juſtification, and tells them what will be their miſery if they perform it not though yet he may, as to the event, nevertheleſs p. 367Decree to cauſe them effectually and infallibly to perform it.

Seeing I have ſpoken ſo much here of Forgiveneſs, I ſhall refer you to it, when I come to ſpeak of other Texts of the like ſenſe.

I might here add (leſt any upon any other Interpretation of this Text, ſhould think it of no weight) that other Scriptures do expreſly aſſert ſome kind of Remiſſion to the Wicked, upon their half Repentance; as to Ahab, the Ninivites; thoſe Heb. 10. that were Sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant, i. e. purified; and thoſe Numb. 14. 20. [I have pardoned them according to thy word] ſaith God of the whole People of Iſrael.

Yea, forbearance of Puniſhment, with hope and means for Everlaſting Eſcape, is a ſort of Remiſſion. Thoſe that ſay this Remiſſion needed not the Sacrifice of Chriſt's Blood to procure it, do ſay that which they will never be able to prove.

The Tenth Text that I ſhall inſiſt on is, … Tim. 4. 9, 10, 11. This is a Faithful Saying, and worthy of all acceptation: For therefore we both la… and ſuffer reproach, becauſe we truſt in the living God, who is the Saviour of all Men, ſpecially of thoſe that believe: Theſe things command and teach.

Davenant putteth in the frontiſpiece of his Diſſertations, theſe words of Proſper on this Text, quae ſententia ſi tranquillo conſideretur intuitu, …um controverſiam dirimit. De vocat. Gent. li. 2. …. 31.

Here its left paſt diſpute, that by [all Men] … meant more than believers, for it is ſuch an p. 368[all Men] as is contradiſtinct from believers, even as the whole from a principal part. There is no room therefore left in this Text for any cavil or exception but this one, viz. whether by (Saviour) be not meant▪ (God the Father as the common preſerver of his Creature, or of Mens natural lives)? Rather then Jeſus Chriſt as Redeemer? This is commonly affirmed, and upon this ground, becauſe it is only ſaid (we truſt in the living God who is the Saviour) and therefore ſay they, this proves not that Chriſt is a Saviour of all by his Death.

Anſw. 1. Whether it be the Father or Son that is here ſpoken of, is no whit material, ſeeing God the Father Redeemeth and ſaveth by his Son, as the Son doth by himſelf. If it be ſpoken of ſaving the Soul, and not only the Body, then it's no matter which perſon it is ſpoken of: For God ſaveth none, but by the Death of his Son. Now that it is ſpoken de De… Redemptore, and not only of God as preſerver o… Mens Bodies, I prove.

1. The word foreign, ſay then the generallity o… Criticks, ſignifieth moren then Servator, ye… than ſalvator, and therefore Laurentius and Grotius turn it ſoſpitator, and Grotius ſaith, that ſervator & ſalvator may be ſpoken of one that preſerveth thoſe that are ſafe and never were miſerable, but ſo it is not here.

2. The ſame word is applied to God in the ſame manner of Speech, twice before in this ſame Epiſtle, and in both places is he called (a Saviour) in reſpect to Eternal Salvation, and not to Temporal only p. 3691 Tim. 1. 1. [Paul an Apoſtle of Jeſus Chriſt by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jeſus Chriſt our Hope. [1 Tim. 2. 3] For this is good and acceptable in the ſight of God our Saviour; Who will have all Men to be ſaved, and to come to the knowledg of the Truth For there is …e God, and one Mediator between God and Man, …e Man Jeſus Chriſt, who gave himſelf a Ranſom for all, to be teſtified in due time.) He that denieth that the Apoſtle doth in both theſe places …ll God a Saviour, in reſpect to Spiritual and Everlaſting Salvation, is either very blind or perverſe. And is it not fit for us to underſtand the ſame phraſe uſed in the next Chapter ſave …e as in the ſame Senſe? If one Scripture muſt interpret another, ſure it is. On 1 Tim. 1. 1. …ſcator himſelf can expound the ſame Phraſe …us [obſerva nomen foreign ſervatoris etiam Patri …ribui. Is enim ſervat nos per Filium: Quippe …m ſalutis noſtrae cauſd miſit, & per quem nos ſibi …conciliavit, per quem etiam Spiritum Sanctum … nos mittit. [And will not an impartial Man …en expound the ſame Phraſe here in the …me manner? Specially there being no rea… to be brought from the Text to the contra…. Even ſo doth Calvin expound 1 Tim. 1. 1. …d 2. 3. and generally all interpreters that I have obſerved. Yea let every place in the New …eſtament be examined where God the Father … called a Saviour, and it will be found to have …ference to Everlaſting Salvation, and not to …poral only. Tit 2. 10. That they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. For the …ce of God that bringeth Salvation, hath appeared …all Men; Tit. 3. 4. But after that the kindneſs p. 370and love of God our Saviour toward Man appeared not by works of Righteouſneſs, which we have done, but according to his mercy he ſaved us by the waſhing of Regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghoſt; which he ſhed on us abundantly, through Jeſus Chriſt our Saviour. Luke 1. 47. My Soul doth magnifie the Lord, and my Spirit hath rejoyced in God my Saviour. So Tit. 1. 3. and Jud. 25. both in the ſame Senſe: And I remember no more in the New Teſtament. And I think no conſiderate Man will in this caſe refer us to the Phraſe o… the Old Teſtament for expoſition of the New who knows and hath well weighed, how ſeldom and darkly Eternal Salvation in Heaven i… mentioned in the Old Teſtament.

3. It ſeems manifeſt to me from the contex… that Paul meant it not only of a Temporal Salvation. For Paul makes this office of God, to be the reaſon of Chriſtians conſtancy in labour and in ſuffering reproach for godlineſs ſake For the Apoſtle oft ſhews us that it was the hope of Glory and not of temporal deliverance that cauſed him to labour and ſuffer, and therefore he truſted here on God as a Saviour Even laſting, and not ſo much as a Temporal Saveour. For he profeſſeth that he knew that where ever he went, bonds and afflictions did abi… him: Yet did he not regard this, nor accou… his Life dear, that he might finiſh his cour… with joy. And on this ground he perſwade Chriſtians to be ſtedfaſt, unmovable, alwa… abounding in the work of the Lord, foraſmu… as they know that their labour was not in va… in the Lord: When as if in this Life only … had hope in Chriſt we were of all Men m… miſerable.

p. 3712. And indeed God is not a Saviour of all Mens Bodies in danger, by any obligation at all, that I know of. No, though they be wronged and ſuffer injuſtly: He doth what he doth of this kind for unbelievers arbitrarily: Let any Man ſhew where God is engaged by any Covenant to ſave unbelievers from bodily dangers. But their Souls he hath redeemed by Chriſt, and ſo ſaved them quoad pretium: And he hath made a Deed of Gift of Chriſt and Eternal Life to all, on condition they refuſe it not. So that he may in reſpect of his Covenant, and ſo in a fuller Senſe, be called their Saviour in Spiritual reſpects than in temporal; for all that they are not eventually ſaved. The word Saviour here implies ſuch a Relation as God hath undertaken, and that Men may aſſure themſelves he will perform all that belongs to it: Or elſe it could not be the ground of our confidence. But wicked Men have no promiſe for, or aſſurance of an hours Life, or any outward deliverance whatſoever; no, not though it were never ſo good for them: For God will not be in Covenant with them for common things till they firſt accept of his Covenant of Grace in Chriſt. But for Salvation, he hath made them a conditional promiſe, as aforeſaid.

3. And it is leſs probable that the Apoſtle calls God a Saviour here ſo equivocally, as not to mean in the ſame kind of Salvation, when yet he intimateth no difference in the Text.

4. But let us ſuppoſe all this were as the opponents would have it, yet for ought I can ſee the Text will fully prove the point in queſtion. p. 372For even in temporal reſpects God is the Saviour of no Man but thoſe whom Chriſt died for. For all Men have forfeited all his Salvation, and are under his Curſe: And he can be no Saviour to them according to the tenor of that curſing violated Law. It muſt be therefore according to the New Law or Covenant, or not at all: And the New Law is founded in the Blood of Chriſt, ſhed for thoſe to whom it is made. Indeed according to the firſt Law he may uphold the Life and Being of Sinners: But it is only as he doth the Devils, to make them capable of puniſhment. But neither do we for that▪ call him the Saviour of the Devils, nor would it be any ſuch great encouragement to Paul and all Chriſtians in labour and ſufferings for godlineſs ſake. So that even this Temporal Salvation, doth preſuppoſe the Relaxation or Non Execution Plenary) of the Law of Works: And that is done only by the remitting Law of Grace; and that preſuppoſeth Chriſts Blood ſhed, or undertaken to beſhed for the ſinners. I know nothing more that needs to be ſpoken to, for vindicating this Text.

The 11th Text ſhall be 1 Joh. 5. 9, 10. 11, [For this is the witneſs which he hath teſtified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witneſs in himſelf. He that believeth not God hath made him a Lyar, becauſe he believeth not the Record that God gave of his Son: And this is the Record, that God hath given us Eternal Life, and this Life is in his Son: He that hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son, hath not Life.

p. 373Hence I thus argue: If Eternal Life in Chriſt be given to unbelievers (who make God a Lyar, and have not Chriſt or Life) then Chriſt was firſt given on the Croſs as a Sacrifice, for thoſe unbelievers. But the Antecedent is true: Therefore ſo is the Conſequent. And conſequently Chriſt died for more than the Elect; and therefore for all.

1. I Suppoſe none that is not willing to be deceived will maintain that it is only ſuch unbelievers as afterward ſhall be converted, and are Elect, who are here ſaid to make God a Lyar: For the Record which they are condemned here for not believing, is the object propounded to Elect and not Elect without ſuch Diſtinction, as they are all conſidered in number of ſinful Mankind.

2. As for the Minor, or Antecedent of the Major propoſition, it is very plain in the Text. If all men ſhould believe (who hear the Goſpel) that Eternal Life in Chriſt is given them, and thoſe that believe it not do make God a Lyar, then it's certain that Eternal Life in Chriſt is given to them all. But, &c. Ergo, &c. There is nothing here to be queſtioned, but only who are meant in the term [Us] when it is ſaid [God hath given [Us] Eternal Life.] And it is plain that it is the ſame perſons (included with others) who are charged with making God a Lyar.

1. Elſe their Unbelief ſhould conſiſt only in not believing that Life is given to other men; and conſequently the Faith required of them ſhould conſiſt only in believing that God hath given Life in Chriſt to others; without any p. 374incluſion of themſelves. But that is not true. Ergo, &c. The falſhood of this conſequent, is proved thus.

1. True ſaving Faith is of a Receiving or Applying nature, as it is the act of the Will, and it is introductory thereto as it is the act of the Underſtanding. But believing that God hath given Life in Chriſt to other men, is not receptive nor applicatory, nor introductory thereto. Ergo, &c. All our Divines againſt the Papiſts do fully maintain the Major.

2. The Devils and the moſt deſpairing men have not ſaving Faith. But the Devils and Deſpairing men do believe that God hath given Eternal Life to others: therefore to believe that God doth give that Life to others is not ſaving Faith.

3. True ſaving Faith is of greateſt concernment to the Believer (as to the object of it,) as being the means of his Salvation. But the believing meerly what God giveth to other men, is of no ſuch concernment to any, Ergo, &c.

Obj. It is not Saving Faith that is here mentioned; nor any act that is proper to a true Believer; nor is it the want of that which is here condemned: But it is the not believing the Truth of the Goſpel, which is only a preparatory act, and which the Devils themſelves may have, who believe and tremble: For though this meer aſſent will not ſave, yet the want of it will condemn.

Anſw. 1. Saving Faith hath two parts according p. 375to the Souls faculties, which have each their ſeveral Offices about this ſaving object: the one is the aſſent of the Underſtanding: the other is the conſent of the Will, (and affiance thence following) when ever Juſtifying Faith is mentioned in the Scripture, it is uſually by one of theſe acts alone; ſometime one, and ſometime another. And when one only is expreſſed, the other is ſtill implied. And ſo it is in this Text.

2. Aſſent is true ſaving Faith, though not the whole of ſaving Faith.

3. It is not meerly aſſent to this propoſition in general [the Goſpel is true] that is here made the Record of God and object of Faith: nor yet aſſent to this [Jeſus is the Son of God, and Saviour of Believers.] But it is this [God hath given us Eternal Life, and this life is in his Son:] ſo that it is to believe that God hath made ſuch a Deed of Gift of Chriſt to us; that is, to Mankind, including our ſelves. Now no Devils do believe this; nor can ſay [God hath given us Eternal Life]

3. And where it may be ſaid that Wicked men may believe it.

I Anſwer, It is true, but not with that deep, intenſe, effectual, operative Belief, which is ſavingly ſincere when the Scripture requireth believing, and condemneth for want of it, it always implieth the neceſſary modification, even that the Act be in ſome meaſure anſwerable to the nature of its object. It ſtill means [ſincere, cordial believing] though it do not alway expreſs it; (nor were it convenient ſo to p. 376do.) And ſo undeniably doth this Text. And this Aſſent no wicked man can have.

4. The Text plainly evinceth the falſhood of the objection, and ſhews that it is a ſaving Faith that is here mentioned, and is oppoſed to the Unbelief here condemned. For it ſaith [He that Believeth hath the witneſs in himſelf] which beyond diſpute is the Holy Ghoſt, which is Chriſts great witneſs in the World, eſpecially in the Souls of Believers. And it is the Holy Ghoſt in ſuch a kind as is common to all true Believers; or elſe the propoſition were not univerſally true; And this muſt needs be, if not only, yet chiefly, the Holy Ghoſt illuminating and ſanctifying. And to this is the condemned Unbelief directly oppoſed in the next words, [He that Believeth not God, hath made him a Lyar.]

Here Amyraldus and Dallaeus coming forth ſtopt me.