Universal redemption of mankind, by the Lord Jesus Christ stated and cleared by the late learned Mr. Richard Barter [sic] ; whereunto is added a short account of Special redemption, by the same author.

Arg. 30. A Comparatione doctrinae universa∣lem satisfactionem affirmantis cum doctrin•• eandem negante.

If they who assert Universal Redemption (quoad satisfactionem & pretium) have all these fore∣mentioned

Arguments 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 Scrip∣ture against them; And if the deniers of Uni∣versal Satisfaction have all the contrary disad∣vantages; then they that affirm Universal Sa∣tisfaction 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 Sa∣tisfaction.

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 Sa∣tisfaction hath all these inconveniences, and ab∣surd 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 overturn∣eth the substance of Christs Law and Gospel promise: or else it maketh God to give con∣ditionally to all men a Pardon and Salvation which Christ never purchased, and without his dying for men.

2. 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 delive∣rance 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 with∣out 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 ut∣terly useless and insufficient for want of a pre∣requisite cause without them, yea which im∣ply 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 nei∣ther would nor could perform (for want of such

satisfaction 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 Sa∣crifice 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 un∣certainty whether they may believe to justifica∣tion or not.

15. It maketh the knowledg that we have justi∣fying Faith to go before the having of that Faith.

16. It denieth the most necessary humbling

aggravation 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 Mi∣nister cannot tell any Man in the World certain∣ly,] 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 gene∣ral legislation, and Judgment according to his Law, which is now founded in his Title of Re∣demption, as the first Dominion and Govern∣ment 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 satis∣faction, 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 suffer∣ing for them.

21. It destroys almost the whole work of the Ministry, disabling Ministers either to hum∣ble

Men 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 hard∣lier with most Men then with the Devils; making them a Law which requireth their be∣lieving in one that never died for them, and taking him for their Redeemer that never re∣deemed 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, with∣out 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 ex∣cept the Elect as deplorate, remediless and hope∣less, as the Case of the damned, and so denieth them to have any day of Grace, Visitation or

Salvation, 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 Re∣deemer 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 accusati∣ons.

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, unsub∣verted? Not that I charge those that deny Uni∣versal satisfaction with holding all these abomi∣nations, 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

as there shall be false teachers among you, who privi∣ly 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 on∣ly, 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 Salva∣tion, 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 ra∣ther then light, because their deeds were evil. 2 Cor. 5. 14, 15. For the love of Christ constraineth us, be∣cause 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,

but 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 be∣lieve. 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 wor∣thy. 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

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. 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 Ho∣ly 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, see∣ing 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 re∣ceived the knowledg of the Truth, there remaineth no more Sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful look∣ing for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the Adversaries. He that despised Moses Law, died without mercy, under two or three Wit∣nesses: 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 un∣holy 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

same shall judg him at the last day. Luke 13. 39. How oft would I have gathered thy Children toge∣ther 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 there∣fore least that come, &c. Behold ye despisers and won∣der, &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 al∣so have had compassion on thy fellow Servant even as I had pitty on thee; And his Lord was wroth and de∣livered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my Heavenly Fa∣ther 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

the 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 trans∣gressions under the first Testament, they which are called might receive the promise of Eternal inheri∣tance. 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 him∣self by him, whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven. Col. 2. 14. Blotting out the handwrit∣ing of ordinances that was against us, which was con∣trary 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. Who∣soever

will, 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 ho∣nour 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. Mar∣vel 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 Resur∣rection 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

made 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, neverthe∣less 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 Co∣venant, 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 rai∣sed 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 Scrip∣ture saith to this point.

3. 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 im∣puting 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 recon∣ciled 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 to∣gether 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,

1 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 pre∣sent 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 for∣giveness 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 a∣gainst 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.

Nor is there any ill consequence following the Doctrine of Universal Satisfaction, but all that terrifies men from it, is seeming ill Conse∣quences for want of right understanding it: most men think (who go that way) that Uni∣versal 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 con∣comitant 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 de∣stroy 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 explica∣tion that must do more here (and is more need∣ful) than argumentation. Yet because some do so importunately call for Arguments I have gi∣ven 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 considera∣tions from the Scripture Language in this par∣ticular.

That Election and Redemption are not of the same extent, and not all Elected that are Re∣deemed, but Redemption is Universal, and E∣lection special may be strongly evinced by com∣paring

together the language of the Scripture, con∣cerning one and the other▪ how differently it speaks.

1. We find God charging Men to give all di∣ligence to make sure their Calling and Election, 2 Pet. 1. 10. But not one word in all the Scrip∣ture 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 Re∣probates? 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) complain∣ing 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 com∣plaining

of 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 E∣lection 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 war∣ned that they destroy not their weak Brethren for whom Christ dyed; and saying, through thy knowledge shall he perish, &c. But he ne∣vea saith, destroy not him (or by thy know∣ledge 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 tread∣ing under foot Gods Election. And their mi∣sery is in this, that there is no more Sacrifice for Sin, but a fearful looking for of Judgment,

and 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 Salva∣tion, 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 un∣worthily 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 Dam∣nation to receive Christ as their Redeemer, Be they never so wicked, it is our office to per∣swade 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;

or to obey God because he hath chosen them.

10. We find Scripture telling us, how hard∣ly 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 ano∣ther: Nor do we find God ever acknowledg∣ing any such thing much less giving them a rea∣son 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

that ground did found his first Title of Dominion and Empire over all the World. And that Redemption hath no more an infalli∣ble 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 ge∣nerally by Divines, that when texts seem con∣tradictory one to another, or several interpre∣tations and opinions are contradictory indeed, that we must ever reduce uncertainties to cer∣tainties, and not contrarily certainties to un∣certainties: and we must interpret obscure texts by reducing them to the plain ones, and not the plain ones by reducing them to the ob∣scure. 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 bet∣ter observed! When God telleth us as plain as can be spoken, that Christ died for and tast∣ed 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

the 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 opi∣nions 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 evi∣dence; 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

going 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 wyer∣drawn 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 Coun∣tryman, 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

tasted 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 symptoma∣tically 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 stretch∣ing, is in great danger of being drawn to question whether it be Gods Word or no, and of ventu∣ring over its bounds in practicals, in case of temptation. For what have we to persuade us that Christ is the eternal God but plain Scrip∣ture? And is it plainer in this than in its affirm∣ing that Christ died for All? All tender con∣scionable Christians should be as fearful to ad∣venture

against 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 Ran∣fom 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 ex∣pressed that the giving of Christ proceeded from Gods Love to the World as the principal efficient, and that it was to this end, that who∣soever 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 Ar∣my 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 dig∣nities] would not ordinary men easily under∣stand this speech? Would so many doubts be raised, whether he mean the whole Army or part? What is meant by [Love] by [Whoso∣ever]

&c. yet here we have such a dust raised in as plain a case, or as plain words as such Di∣vine 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 Pro∣mise, 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 elucida∣tionem, observandum est cum decrevisset Fidem & Rescipiscentiam electis suis non modo concedere, sed & easdem modo naturae ipsorum rationali convenien∣tissimo, 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]

hinc evincitur mittendi Mediatoris duplicem Deo habendam fuisse rationem, alteram Pretii; alteram Efficaciae Nam & Pretium oportuit sufficiens esse re∣dimendis omnibus; alias enim tam generali promis∣sioni [quisquis crediderit salvus erit] locus nullus fuisset: & rursus oportuit efficax esse redimendis electis: alias enim frustra fuissent constituti ad ob∣tinendam 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 & Genera∣lem omnium invitationem ad fidem in hanc formam [Quisquis credit in Christum, non peribit, sed habet vitam aeternam] Hujus autem invitationis Genera∣lis fundamentum, est pretii a Christo soluti suffici∣entia. Atque hic rursus sese in gerit 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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, San∣ctification, and Salvation of Sinners. It is only of this latter that solid Divines speak, when

they 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 sa∣tisfaction (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 sa∣tisfaction so made for the pardoning and saving of all that will believe. It is the latter suffi∣ciency which is to be distinguish'd from the lat∣ter efficiency, and that implies some efficiency as necessary to that sufficiency, viz. The effi∣ciency 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.

4. 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 work∣ing 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 contra∣distinction 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 in∣cludeth 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 de∣nied without evident cause, and when there is cause of denying that sense, we must go but to

the 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 Man∣kind 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 se∣cond 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 promul∣gation, 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 Ante∣cedent, 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 Salva∣tion 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 be∣lieving; it being usual in Scripture and com∣mon speech, to make [whosoever will] and [if you will] equally conditionally. Whosoever will, let him take the water of Life freely, is equi∣valent

to 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 an∣swer, no, not directly, it is but the universal ex∣tension of the Conditional Promise, with an ex∣pression of the conditionality; but consequently it is distributive, though Antecedently and di∣rectly it be not. As in the former Comparison, when you say [whosoever will list himself, &c] the word [whosoever] is not directly distribu∣tive, for you offer all that hear you that privi∣ledge, 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 differ∣encing Causes; but not properly from the pro∣mise or deed of gift at all, except by acci∣dent.

3. The next words shew what [World] it is that is here spoken of, viz. That which com∣prizeth men that believe, and so are not Con∣demned; and those that believe not (which Consideration is consequential, and not antece∣dent to Christ's dying for them) and so are Con∣demned already, because they have not belie∣ved, &c. v. 18. They that will affirm a greater restriction in the sense of the word, must prove

it. 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 exa∣mine 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, Tri∣umphant Expressions which some do abound with, but that I draw out only the pith of their Argu∣ments, and set Reason against Reason, and let the heaps of Worldly Rhetorical Gloryings a∣lone: Much more must I expect that you will not take me to be engaged to defend any Armi∣nian misinterpretations and weaknesses, and to confute what any man saith against them, but only that which seems of force against the in∣terpretations 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 inter∣pretation of John.

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

Answ. 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 ob∣taining 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 gi∣ving 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 Pro∣mise 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

that makes no alteration or differencing nature in this Universal Conditional promise, it is be∣cause 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 Condi∣tional 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 per∣verting 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 neces∣sity 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 Happi∣ness which the first Covenant promised) who yet did dye for Sin.

The 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 cal∣led 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 conditi∣onal 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.

Ans. 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 esta∣blishment of Christs visible Kingdom, which contains more than the Elect. The Net of the Gospel brings Fishes good and bad. The Hea∣then Countries that have turned to the Lord from Paganism and Infidelity, have not all be∣lieved to Salvation. The Kingdoms of the

World 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 with∣out cause: Nor is it sufficient that unusually it is otherwise taken.

3. The conjoyned words will shew the ne∣cessity 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.

Ans. 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 Co∣venant; 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 lov∣eth those in Hell, as his Creatures and as Men: Aquinas and the rest of the Schoolmen have it frequently: Yea Ursine, Rob. Baronius and ma∣ny of our Protestant Divines say, that he pun∣isheth 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 per∣forming

the condition. To the Elect themselves these Effects are changeable.

3. If you say, God's Love is but his Velle bo∣num alicui; and therefore he cannot be said now Men are in Hell to continue to will them a con∣ditional 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, under∣take 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 con∣tinue to all Eternity, to will to create Man, to redeem him, to call him, justifie him, deli∣ver him, raise him, &c. then I will tell you how God will Eternally will the giving Christ Par∣don and Salvation conditionally to all. If you say, he Wills them as preterita, and not as pre∣sentia 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.

To 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 ea∣sily denied. Dare Men say, that it was no mer∣cy 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 there∣in the offer and conditional gift of Christ, Pardon, Justification and Salvation is no mer∣cy, 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 mer∣cy?

Having examined what they say, to prove that by [the World] is meant [the Elect on∣ly] I find it needless to examine the rest about the Sense of the word [loved] and [whosoe∣ver] 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 de∣ny not this Act to be free: And therefore take not natural, For,

Physical (as if God loved us as the Fire burn∣ed, quantum in se)

2. Nor yet Constrained: And it must be ob∣served, that both the Text, and those that thus interpret it, speak only of God's Love to Man∣kind 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 Salvati∣on.

And for the other words [whosoever believ∣eth] as I have said before, they are primarily and directly the conditional expression, and to all: But secondarily and accidentally distribu∣tive, 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 Re∣mission 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 be∣lieveth on him is not condemned, but he that believ∣eth 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.]

Here 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 be∣lieve 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 Be∣lievers eventually saved, and Unbelievers even∣tually condemned. If this be denied, the next words annexed are so clear, that I desire the Rea∣der, but without prejudice, to consider them, and use no violence with his judgment in expound∣ing 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 pur∣pose shall stand.

Ans. 1. He will do all that he is pleased to do: But not all that he is pleased to com∣mand Man to do: Nor all that he is pleased

to 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 even∣tually, 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 Le∣gislative: So each act of his Will hath its pro∣per end (as we may ascribe any end to Gods Will, distinct from himself by improper speech.) His decreed or purposed ends he al∣ways attains (supposing them absolute: For I will not in this place touch that contro∣versie, whether God have a conditional decre∣tive Will de rerum eventu: But his Legal prescri∣bed 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 Salva∣tion 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 Salva∣tion 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.

4. 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 under∣stood 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 pro∣pound Salvation, to Man as his end: And to promise it on his conditions, and prescribe those conditions and command Man to per∣form 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 pre∣scriptus & 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 que∣stion

true, 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, de∣crees. This I add, because I know they here usually answer that God intendeth no end con∣ditionally, 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 Wil∣ling. So that ex parte voliti it is conditional, though not ex parte actus volentis.

This Dr. Twiss saith o••t consid. of Tilenus Si∣nod 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 pro∣fess

that Christ died for all, in respect of pro∣curing 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 purpo∣sed Life to the World upon condition of Obe∣dience and Repentance, provided that you un∣derstand it right; viz. that Obedience and Re∣pentance 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 Scrip∣tures be interpreted, which ascribe such Vel∣leities and Unaccomplished willings to God: Yea were these few lines given in answer to this question well weighed, (if through partia∣lity 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 Re∣demption; and I am loath to repeat one thing

oftener than needs I must. Only I say, when Christ died Millions of Men were actually sav∣ed: 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 De∣crees; 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-futu∣rition 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 command∣ed 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

not 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 turn∣ing 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,

1. 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 Au∣thor of Faith by his Spirit, he worketh diffe∣rently.

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 believ∣ed 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

because 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 Unbelie∣vers 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 Judg∣eth 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here are expressions plain enough to ex∣clude 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 doth make Christs reason to be in∣valid, 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 hearti∣ly and firmly believe, and therefore they then

went 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 with∣out 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 eat∣ing, 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 Eve∣ry 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 ob∣ject of Christs intendments to purchase for them, and bestow upon them Life and Sal∣vation.

Now I ask, Whether any man, not bereaved of all Spiritual and Natural sense, can imagine that Christ in his Oblation in∣tended 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 not∣withstanding 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 rea∣son in exercise. This is a heavy charge on all the Fathers, and later Divines and Godly Peo∣ple 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 Sal∣vation to all on condition they will receive it

in 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 disap∣pointment. 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 damna∣ble 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

them not to have known the way of Righteous∣ness, 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 ex∣plication 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 de∣nied 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 pol∣lutions 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 Christi∣ans) 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

Lord 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 ap∣pears that after their first death, they had re∣ceived 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 Lasci∣viousness, 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 re∣covery) which they so turned into Lascivious∣ness. 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 spo∣ken, 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.

1.

That there are no spiritual distinguish∣ing 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 aggrava∣tion 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 Re∣demption. It is easier to take these as certain∣ties 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 aggra∣vate the sins of any other, according to the se∣veral 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 uncer∣tainties.

And 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 pro∣per for our Saviour in the work of Redemp∣tion? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is such a Lord and Master as re∣fers 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is applied to Christ; seeing there is no

disswading 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as it is said of God, Psal. 103. 19. by the Sept. Erasmus saith, siquid interest 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 privati juris nomen est, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 honoris & authoritatis: And then we may see that both both belong to Christ, and yet no wonder if he be more often called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

3. If it were God the Father that is here cal∣led 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 Que∣stion.

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 pur∣chasing 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 bene∣fits received by them could come no other way. But let us see their Reasons.

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

Answ. 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, signifieth pri∣marily the buying of things, translatitiously the Redemption of Persons.

Answ. 1. It signifies any buying in the Mar∣ket 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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Rev. 14. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And 1 Cor. 6. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 did not alone signifie to buy with a price.

2. Hath every place that treats of proper Re∣demption 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 af∣firms their deliverance to consist in the escaping

of 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 interpre∣tation? and to have said it was spoken but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 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 a∣gainst 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 ap∣pear

how 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 according to its reserved exception, and that Christ's suffering was the proper fulfilling of the Law, and the Rea∣son 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. illumina∣tion, 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 Co∣venant, 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 Mer∣cies. 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.

Before I come to their last Reason, I will give you the Judgment of some Orthodox In∣terpreters on this Text, that you may see whe∣ther 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 Chri∣stus, 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 in∣quinamentis, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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.

[Deum, qui solus Herus est: Vetusti quidam Codi∣ces habent [Christum qui solus est Deus ac Herus] & certe. (Others say it is an uncertainty) in se∣cundâ Petri Epistolâ, solius Christi fit mentio & ille herus vocatur.] You see Calvin speaks both for the sense of these Texts, and the point of Uni∣versal Redemption as much and as plain as I.

The second shall be the Divines of the Assem∣bly 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 se∣cond, 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 profes∣sed themselves to be of his Household) and their Lord by publick Authority over them, or by their deeds denying Christ] so that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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

seem to speak of two Persons, of God the Fa∣ther, and God the Son: But indeed the whole Sentence is to be understood of Christ, who is called God and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Master, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 Ma∣ster, 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. expoun∣deth 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 Re∣deemed, 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 ab∣negaturi 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

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 Contro∣versies of almost any Learned Judicious Pious Divine.

3. I come next to the Third and last Rea∣son, which is given to shew that Christ bought

not these men: The foresaid Author saith Neither is it more certain that the Apostle speaketh of the purchase of the Wolves and Hy∣pocrites, 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. I am ashamed unfeignedly to re∣member the time when I took up with this in∣terpretation my self, and had the face to main∣tain 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 profes∣sion might have better warranted a mistaking charitable judgment; but it is after by Aposta∣cy they cast away that profession, and so if be∣fore we might have indulged a charitable mista∣ken 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,

therefore 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, with∣out any need or fair reason!

4. May not a Man by this dealing say what he will as the meaning of Scripture? May not al∣most any truth of God expresly affirmed in Scripture, be said to be spoken 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? 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 be∣cause 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 Condi∣tion.

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.

3. 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 Condem∣nation?

4. Why else may not we still use this Lan∣guage, 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 Commu∣nicants, as they do when they use these Argu∣ments 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 Scrip∣ture 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 de∣nominated by himself? What Man then will believe that it was called Holy, meerly from the Peoples professing to be Holy?

The 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 blin∣ded 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, con∣trary 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 fre∣quently 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 delu∣ded 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 Da∣mascus that smote him,] where by supine over∣sight,

Men 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 Da∣mascus. 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 percutientienti∣bus 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

themselves 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 inva∣sion 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is not barely to crucifie Christ again, but to crucifie him to themselves again: That is, either finaliter (as some expound it) or efficien∣ter (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 Sacri∣fice, 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,

(because he died not to satisfie for that sin.) So Paraeus expoundeth it; sed quomodo hoc faci∣endo Christum denuò crucifigunt sibimetipsis? Quia filium Dei semel crucifixum abnegando, nolunt salva∣ri ejus morte ex qua sola dependet resipiscentia & salus. Si igitur resipiscere & servari deberent, de∣nuò crucifigendus esset eis Christus; quod est impossi∣bile, quia amplius mori non potest. Sic infra cap. 10. Videtur declarare, non est eis reliqua hostia pro peccato postquam unicam Christi hostiam semel ab∣jecerunt & 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 novita∣tem. Qui•• ergo in mortem recidunt, opus habent secundo sacrificio, ut capite decimo habebimus. Cru∣cifigentes 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 de∣claretur 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 unrecover∣able. For the Holy Ghost here plainly inti∣mateth

that this unrecoverableness is the fruit of their Apostacy; and that they were not unreco∣verable 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 rea∣son 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 prob∣able 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 se∣cond 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,

(nay the Conatus or meer desire of it) which was pardonable then, should become un∣pardonable 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 satisfacti∣on, 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 sa∣tisfied 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 bene∣fits 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

may 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 indigna∣tion, which shall devour the Adversaries. He that despised Moses Law, died without mercy, under two or three Witnesses: Of how much sorer punish∣ment 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 Sancti∣fied, an unholy thing, and hath done despight to the Spirit of Grace? Hence I raise two Ar∣guments.

1. Those who receive the mercies here men∣tioned 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, be∣fore

it 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 pro∣portionable, 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 re∣maineth 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 de∣sperate 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 Sacri∣fice. If other Mens, then that proves not their

case any more desperate than it was: For a Sa∣crifice 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 con∣sequent of their Apostacy. If 100 Soldiers be taken Prisoners by the Enemy, and their for∣mer Prince shall Redeem 50 of them by a Ran∣som, 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 for∣sake 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 pro∣nounce these Apostates to be therefore misera∣ble, 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 in∣timates that there was once a Sacrifice for their sin till they by Rejection, deprived themselves of the benefit of it.

Obj. 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 Aposta∣cy 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 be∣fore; and therefore they are more miserable.]

Ans. Then all the inconvenience that Aposta∣cy brought on them was but a disclosing of the truth (that they had never any remedy or Sacri∣fice for their sin) a little sooner than it should else have been disclosed. But that's a far smal∣ler 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 dis∣closed to you that he never died for you.] In∣deed this Doctrine suits well with the Anti∣nomian fancies, which make our love and obe∣dience

to 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 Sacri∣fice.

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 redeem∣ed 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 al∣so 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••

illius 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 quaeren∣da salus, ne miremur omnes qui eum sponte relin∣quent, 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 Evan∣gelii ad judaicas hostias mali••iose relabantur, nulla eis reliqua sit hostia pro 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 punish∣ment for their Apostacy: Christ did not pu∣nish Mens Apostacy on the Cross by not dying for them, Paraeus adds [Hostiam pro peccato in∣telligit expiatoriam propter quam Deus placatus re∣mittat eis peccata. Negando hanc reliquam esse Apo∣statis, negat spem remissionis, veniae, gratiae aut salu∣tis ullam eis superesse. Negando enim causam negat affectum: Quaeris cur nulla supersit? Quia non est nisi unica Hostia peccatorum expiatrix, nempe Ponti∣ficis Christi hactenus ad longum demonstrata: Hanc vero abjiciunt Apostatae. Nulla igitur alia eis est re∣liqua.) So that there was a Sacrifice remaining to them for their sin, before their Aposta∣cy.

Bullingar in loc. saith [Jam vero cum non sit alia nisi una pro peccatis hostia, illi autem hanc uni∣cam contemnant; certè aliam non invenient ullam.] Marlorat adds [talibus ergo contemptoribus nulla s••es veniae relinquitur] So that they had a Sacri∣fice 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 sancti∣fied 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 Rea∣der to throw away all in weariness or loath∣ing.

1. This speaks only of some that were pro∣fessors 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

of 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 de∣clare 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 Redempti∣on. See Calvin, Beza, Paraeus, Piscator, Per∣kins, Dickson, Bullinger, &c.

3. They say [It is certain that these Men made profession of all these things, &c. and there∣fore the open renouncing them was a sin so hai∣nous 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 bap∣tised 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 com∣monly esteemed to be, and at that time in the Judgment of charity were to be considered, &c.]

Answ. 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 them∣selves not to be so. The Apostles will not en∣courage known falshood in the Speeches or Opi∣nions 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.

2. 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 Uni∣versal 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 regenera∣ted Believers, much less that Christ died for them, &c.]

Answ. 1. That they were illuminated, and par∣takers 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 Sancti∣fication, I affirm not. Yet was it true.

2. Is it a strained consequence to con∣clude,

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?

2. 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 con∣trary-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 un∣grateful 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 Mar∣riage 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 kil∣ling 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 Invita∣tion or Offer. Hence therefore I thus argue;

If 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 pre∣paredly 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, ex∣cept their final refusal, and thereby made rea∣dy 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 con∣cerned 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

nothing 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, Sa∣tisfaction 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.

Obj. 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 enact∣ing 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.

3. 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 Inter∣preters 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 Dona∣tion, 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 super∣abundance 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 ano∣ther

day, 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 can∣not.

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 de∣lude 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 perdi∣tion on their own will, still in his word, and will do at Judgment.

2. God hath taught all men naturally to ac∣cuse 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

overthrow 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 offen∣der on that ground? If a VVhore-monger or Drunkard so accustom themselves to those sins that they have contracted a habit, and can∣not 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 in∣treat 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 unre∣verence 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

left without all just excuse, and be speech∣less.

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 for∣gave 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 Tor∣mentors 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 Pa∣rables, 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.]

2. 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 under∣stood.

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 Le∣gislator 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 Wis∣dom of God, that Christ and not man himself should be the first receiver of the pardon and other benefits: but with this difference.

1. 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 ex∣ercise 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 com∣mitted all Absolution to the Son: For Absolu∣tion 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 Au∣thorized: 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 con∣dition, they will accept him and pardon with him] so that this is Christs first pardoning act and this is but a conditional pardon, and there∣fore is not yet full, and actual.

3. 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 non∣performance of the condition: it being the Will of the Legislator or Donor, that his Instru∣ment should not act or remit sin till men be∣lieve.

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 se∣veral acts tending to the full perfecting of our Pardon and Justification, and are all called Par∣don, and must all proceed in this order one after another.

Moreover the third of these, or the proper∣est remission in this life, is of divers sorts or de∣grees, 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 Disso∣lution of the Obligation to Punishment; and so doth constitutive Justification too: But the term Justification respecteth more strongly [the obligation] dissolved; and the word [Remissi∣on] 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 there∣fore

it is both Obligationis Relaxatio vel Remissio, & Poenae Remissio, but most properly and princi∣pally the last. And therefore it is a right di∣stribution of Remission, which is taken from the diversity of the Penalties remitted.

Let us therefore First distinguish of Punish∣ment that we may the better distinguish of Re∣mission. And before that let us define Punish∣ment.

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 priva∣vation 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 Punish∣ment in General, and is common to all Punish∣ment. 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 re∣moval of such good, whose loss is tolerable.

2. 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 Ri∣gour, 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 com∣monly called [Chastisement] yea, [Paternal Chastisement] because of tenderness and Love that accompanieth it; though indeed it is com∣mon 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,

or of the Evil that is in it, is the demonstration of Justice in some measure, however modera∣ted and prevailed over by Mercy; even Fa∣thers 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 Vin∣dictive.

And as Remission must be distinguished ac∣cording to the diversity of the penalty remit∣ted, 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 Ori∣ginal 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 Habi∣tually Penitent, and Believing. This is com∣monly called Particular Remission, or Justifi∣cation.

Also in regard of the obligation, dissolved re∣mission must be distinguished: For it is either the penalty of the Law of Works (which is re∣mitted 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 pe∣remptory

sentence of Christ's Law] as distinct from the former, which they call [the remissi∣ble 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 mo∣ral 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 con∣tinuance thereof.

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

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

Conclus. 1. In the first remitting act (where∣in 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 a∣way 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.

Concl. 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-per∣formance of the said Condition.

Concl. 3. Neither of these Acts, or any fol∣lowing, do remit the proper, viz. final non-per∣formance 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 punish∣ment, but all the temporal punishment which is of the fore-described Nature, which Christ re∣mitteth 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 par∣doned, 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 conti∣nuance of it, both Universal and particular Re∣mission,

are still but Conditional till death, and the Condition of Continuance (as is beforesaid) is more than the Condition of our first obtain∣ing.

Concl. 9. That Men lose not Justification or Remission, therefore comes not from the Na∣ture of the thing, nor the Tenor of the Remit∣ting-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 re∣newed Remission and Justification, by causing them to persevere, and overcome, and there∣fore God as Legislator (in Precepts, Prohibi∣tions, Threats, and Rewarding Promises) doth still deal with all Men as defectible, and suppo∣seth the possibility of their falling away from Grace, and perishing. But God as Eternal E∣lector, and Determiner▪ of Events by his De∣crees, dealeth with all his Elect as Men whom he resolveth infallibly to Save, and whose Apo∣stacy 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 per∣verting of them is properly impossible, as well as not future (as Christ himself tells us.)

Concl. 10. It is evident therefore that Remis∣sion and Justification are not perfect in this lifie, both in that many sins are still behind to be re∣mitted, and from whose guilt a particular Just∣fication is necessary to be added; and also be∣cause

the very continuance of the Justification and Remission received is but Conditional; and a Conditional Grant is not so perfect as an abso∣lute, or when the Condition is all performed.

Concl. 11. That punishment which man was sentenced to Gen. 3. after his fall, and the Re∣deemer inflicteth in this Life on merciful terms (where there is a greater demonstration of mer∣cy, 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 morti∣fication 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 Pu∣nishment, else would they know that Chastise∣ment 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

numeris perfect in this Life, there being still some unforgiven Punishment to be suffered here.

Hence you may see how to judge of the Con∣troversie so much agitated between us and the Papists, Utrum Remissd Culpa remaneat poena temporalis? Whether Temporal Punishment re∣main when the Sin is forgiven: (And how in∣distinctly 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 Ortho∣dox say, than what God saith, or the Nature of the thing containeth. Hear the Scripture, Lam. 3. 42. [We have▪ transgressed, we have Re∣belled, 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 a∣gainst this Doctrine, who (falsly) teach, that that it is only Temporal Punishment or Chastise∣ment that Believers Pray against, when they daily Pray, forgive us our Trespasses (as the most moderate of their Books do affirm.

Concl. 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 Mer∣cies) 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, Re∣mission may be said to be perfect; that is, quan∣tum in se in illa Relatione, he hath perfectly par∣doned 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 De∣gree '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 im∣perfect through our incapacity. As a King re∣ceiving a Ransom for a Prisoner, may agree when all the Ransom is paid, that yet he shall be delivered but by Degrees, or upon Condi∣tions.

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 Punish∣ment 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

Destructive punishment, and as Salvation is gi∣ven by: But it is by a Promise with Exception or Reserve: As if Christ should say, [Ordina∣rily 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 Wis∣dom, 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 com∣paratively, why he punisheth Job more than ano∣ther, 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 Punish∣ment.

2. Mark that this Gospel Promise of Mercy, and remission of Temporal Corrective Punish∣ment in part, is properly a Conditional Promise as it respecteth God's ordinary dealing with Men, but it is not an infallible ascertaining Pro∣mise 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 tempo∣ral

Deliverances, Absolutely, or Conditionally.

Concl. 15. As all Punishments on the Elect be∣fore Conversion (while yet God hateth them as Workers of Iniquity, and they are Children of wrath) are not of the first sort (in demonstra∣tion 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 Fa∣ther 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 punish∣ments 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 impro∣ving.

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

act of God, as determining of events by his se∣cret 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) ta∣king 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 for∣give their sins: Though yet the Destructive E∣ternal 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 se∣cundum quid, and in the weakest Sense.

I have on occasion of this Text run quite be∣yond my first intentions in opening the nature and sorts of remission, but yet I hope not un∣profitably.

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 rever∣sible, 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

3. 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 Re∣mission. 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 re∣laxed 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 Un∣believers, and Believers; there is no real change in it when men believe, only the same instru∣ment doth then morally act, that is, actually re∣mit sin, which before it did not, because it was suspended on a Condition which was not per∣formed. But Christ hath done his part as Te∣stator, 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 even∣tually 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 Legi∣slator and Teacher, supposing the possibility o•• their not performing the Condition of the Con∣tinuance of Justification, and tells them what will be their misery if they perform it not though yet he may, as to the event, neverthe∣less

Decree to cause them effectually and infal∣libly to perform it.

Seeing I have spoken so much here of Forgive∣ness, 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, spe∣cially 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

[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 affirm∣ed, and upon this ground, because it is only said (we trust in the living God who is the Sa∣viour) 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, see∣ing 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, say then the generallity o•• Criticks, signifieth moren then Servator, ye•• than salvator, and therefore Laurentius and Gro∣tius turn it sospitator, and Grotius saith, that ser∣vator & salvator may be spoken of one that pre∣serveth those that are safe and never were mi∣serable, but so it is not here.

2. The same word is applied to God in the same manner of Speech, twice be∣fore in this same Epistle, and in both pla∣ces is he called (a Saviour) in respect to Eternal Salvation, and not to Temporal only

1 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 Sa∣viour; 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 deni∣eth 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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

and 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 sel¦dom 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 Sal¦vation. 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 there¦fore he trusted here on God as a Saviour Even lasting, and not so much as a Temporal Save¦our. 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.

2. 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 wrong∣ed 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 dan∣gers. 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 Cove∣nant, 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 out∣ward 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 afore∣said.

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.

For even in temporal respects God is the Savi∣our of no Man but those whom Christ died for. For all Men have forfeited all his Salva∣tion, 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 there∣fore 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 De∣vils, nor would it be any such great encourage∣ment to Paul and all Christians in labour and sufferings for godliness sake. So that even this Temporal Salvation, doth presuppose the Re∣laxation or Non Execution Plenary) of the Law of Works: And that is done only by the re∣mitting 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.

Hence 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 conse∣quently 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 un∣believers as afterward shall be converted, and are Elect, who are here said to make God a Lyar: For the Record which they are condemn∣ed here for not believing, is the object pro∣pounded to Elect and not Elect without such Distinction, as they are all considered in num∣ber 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

inclusion 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 De∣spairing 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 concern∣ment 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, Er∣go, &c.

Obj. It is not Saving Faith that is here men∣tioned; 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 pre∣paratory 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 accord∣ing

to 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 men∣tioned 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 answer∣able 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

do.) 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 illuminat∣ing and sanctifying. And to this is the con∣demned 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.