A further defence of the report. Vindicating it from Mr. Alsops Cavils, and shewing the difference between Mr. W's and my self to be real, and the charge in my appeal to be true.

The Fifth Objection.

That by saying Christ sustained the Person of Sinners, Mr. L. must be thought to acknowledge, That he dyed for the Reprobate, as well as for the Elect, and that it favours the Nestorians, who maintain, That Christ was constituted of two Per∣sons.

Reply.

1. What is objected against me in these words, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as much against the generation of the Orthodox, ••ho use the same Phrases which I do. Not that ••••intend only the Lutherans in this Instance, who are ••••iesly concern'd in the first part of the Objection, or I use it in no other sense than the Reformed ••••nerally do.

2. The Conffusion which the Author of this Objection is fallen into, in his opposing the Phrase 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Christs sustaining the Person of Sinners, has ••oved some to fear, that all things are not Right ••ith him. For one while this Phrase can signifie ••othing less than that Christ puts on the Disguise of ••inners (Horresco referens) and Acts the part of a ••age-Player; at another time, it must import Ne∣••ianism, as if Christ had taken on him the Natu∣•••••• Person of Sinners; And again, the Enquiry is, ••hether the Persons of Sinners are not Ʋnited, ••nd to be considered as One Person, and whether ••hrist did not die and satisfie for that One Person, ••hat is for all equally, which he doth not believe to ••e our sense, as he declares. But,

3. The sense, in which we use this Phrase, is known to Divines of the least accquaintance with these Studies, so that unless there had been a fault somewhere, the Objector could not have been thus puzzled, for it hath been cleared in my De∣fence, that when its said Christ sustained the Person of Sinners, it's not meant that the Person he took on him, was either a Feigned or a Natural Person, that it was only a Legal Person; so that, did he understand what is most plain and easie, he could not but see that he had not the least Pretence for his Blasphemous Representation of our blessed Saviour's Acting the part of a Stage-Player; nor for his charging us with Nestorianism.

4. As for his Endeavour to infer from this Phrase of [Christs sustaining the Person of Sinners] the Doctrine of Universal Redemption, is so de∣stitute of the least colour of Reason, that as he believes we do not hold it, so it hath no Founda∣tion for its support: For the Phrase of [Christ sustaining the Person of Sinners] and that other o•• [Christs dying for Sinners] is of one and the same Extent, and the Interpretation given by the Ortho∣dox of the one, is sufficient to vindicate the other from his trifling Cavils. But,

5. When we say, That Christ sustained the Per∣son of Sinners, we mean it of those Sinners, who are given by the Father to the Son, whom the Father will draw unto him, who come to the Father by the Son, do believe are Converted, Regenerated and Saved. In a word, we mean it of Elect Sinners.