Son redeemed all and the Father elected but few is to give greater Honour to the Second Person than to the first and to make an Inequality in their Operations the Second Scripture is John 17.9,10 All thine are mine and all mine are thine c. They were the Father 's by Election before they be the Son 's by Redemption Thine they were and thou gavest them me v. 6 8. Christ redeems only those whom God gave him to redeem Hence God's Book of Life wherein the Number of the Elect is recorded is call'd also the Lamb's Book of Life to intimate that the Number of those Elected by the Father is commensurate with those redeemed by the Son And that Christ redeems no more but whom the Spirit sanctifies appears likewise from 1 John 5.6,7 there must be Water to sanctifie where there is Blood to redeem Christ's Oblation is not of a larger Extent than the Spirit 's Operation Thus it is made apparent that all the Three Persons in the Trinity have all one Object and Design of Love the Son's design for Redemption hath not a greater Latitude then the Father 's for Election and the Spirit 's for Sanctification all equal in Essence Honour and Operation Argument 2. The Benefits of Christ's Death and Resurrection are of equal Extent in their Objects but the Benefit of Christ's Resurrection is not extended to all Ergo Nor the Benefit of his Death The Assumption to wit that the Benefit of Christ's Resurrection is not extended to all and every one alike but is peculiar to Believers is acknowledg'd by the Arminians The Proposition therefore is only to be proved That the Benefits of both the Death and Resurrection of Christ are of equal Extent in their Objects is evident from Rom. 8.34 if we partake of Christ's Death we must of his Resurrection too Rom. 6 5. they are both put together and a rather added to the latter Who shall lay any thing to the Charge of God's Elect for whom Christ died Who can condemn those for whom Christ was rais'd There is an equal Extent both of the one and of the other Those whom Christ died and rose again for cannot be condemned but this cannot be said of all for the Wrath of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abides on many John 3 last and from Rom. 4. last He dyed for our sins and was raised again for our justification They are both so joyn'd together that they cannot be severed either in Act Object or Effecr for no Man is made Partaker of the Death of Christ but by his Resurrection 2 Cor. 5.14 1 Cor. 15.17 Those that have the Fruit of the Battel in this have the fruit of the Victory too which cannot be all for the Wrath of God abides on some which the Death of Christ never took away from them Christ did not dye for some Men for whom he did not overcome Death Argument 3. The Benefits of Christ's Death and Intercession are of equal Extent in their Objects but the Benefit of Christ's Intercession is not to all Ergo. The Assumption is express Scripture John 17.9 his Intercession is only for those that the Father hath given him not for the World and Reason confirms it for if Christ interceded for Judas Pilate c. then had he a Repulse and was not always heard of the Father contrary to John 11.42 The Proposition is true for Christ is an High Priest and the two parts of his Sacerdotal Office to wit Oblation and Presentation cannot be separated one from another and they have a part in the Latter that have a part in the Former for Presentation doth necessarily imply the Oblation and gives a perpetual Force and Vigor to it in the sight of God Heb. 9.12 It is not enough to prepare the Price of Redemption but it must be presented also to the Father Heb. 9.24 Yea * Disput Publ. 14. Thes 14. Arminius himself grants that Presentation is a part of the Oblation Christ must be an Intercessor for those to whom he is a Reconciler and his Intercession in Heaven is not a Vocal Praying but a personal Presenting of himself and his five Wounds to the Father in the behalf of those whom he personated on the Cross as the High Priest of Israel in slaying the Sacrifice put not the Sins of the Gentiles upon the Head of the Beast but the Sins of Israel only and in his going into the Sanctum Sanctorum he did not represent the Gentiles to God but the Twelve Tribes of Israel written upon his Breast-plate Thus Christ is only a Priest to satisfie both in his Oblation and Presentation for 〈◊〉 only to whom he is a Prophet to teach and a King to rule otherwise we shall make an Inequality in his Offices as well as in the Persons of the Trinity We cannot say there be some Men for whom Christ offered himself upon Earth but doth not offer himself for them in Heaven this is to make Christ but an half Priest to some and so is not a faithful High-Priest contrary to sundry Scriptures Isa 53. 11,12 1 John 2.1,2 Heb. 9.11,12 10.19,20,21 Argument 4. Those for whom Christ dyed have Christ for their Surety but all have not Christ for a Surety Ergo. He dyed not for all The Proposition is evident for every Sinner must dye for eating forbidden fruit either in himself or in his Sponsor and Surety the Wages of Sin is Death Herein consists the Suretiship of Christ that he dyeth for us 2 Sam. 18.33 Rom. 5.7 9.3 the very Phrase of dying for one demonstrates it The Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thacath vice loco in the place and stead So the Septuagint Syriack Version and Chaldee Paraphrase reads David's Desire I would I had dyed in thy stead and thou remain'd alive otherwise Christ's Death had not been a counter Ransom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 1◠45. Mat. 20.28 which the Syriack reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vice multorium Thus Christ is made a Curse for us i. e. in our stead The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek Testament are frequently used in this Sense Thus Judah was Surety for Benjamin's Sasety Gen. 44.32 and Christ is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Surety of the New Covenant Heb. 7.22 taking upon him our Sins in his Death Isa 53.5,6,7 1 Pet. 2.24 and was made Sin for us 2 Cor. 5.21 which intimates a Commutation of Persons the one being accepted in the room of another The Assumption is as plain for were he a Surety for all then had he satisfied for all in becoming Sin and bearing the Curse and Wrath of God in their stead This is not done for all For 1. God will require of some the utmost Farthing Mat. 5.26 unless his Satisfaction was rejected as insufficient 2. Many were in Hell at that time when Christ dyed actually tormented 3. Christ knows not Workers of Iniquity Mat. 7.23 so as he knows his Sheep to
lay down his Life for them John 10.11,14,15 the latter is the Evidence of the former 4. Christ could not intend to waste the Blood of his Covenant whereof he was the Surety upon Cain and Pharaoh damned long before his Death in direct Opposition to the Eternal Decree of his own Deity There cannot be a Surrogation of Christ's Person in the room of the damned Argument 5. If the Covenant of Grace be not to all then Christ dyed not for all but the Anrecedent is true therefore c. the Consequence is prov'd thus Christ's Blood is called the Blood of the Covenant Heb. 9.20 with 8.13 and Exod. 24.8 and the Blood of the New Testament Mat. 26.28 the Covenant and the Seal of the Covenant have a necessary Connexion together and Mens Covenants are Insignificant without a Seal Moreover where a Testament is there must also be the Death of the Testator otherwise 't is of no force while the Testator liveth Heb. 9.16,17 The New Testament and New Covenant are undoubted Synonima's and are in Scripture of the same sense and signification The Assumption to wit the Covenant of Grace is not to all is true some are without the Covenant Eph. 2.12 Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus and Salvation is of the Jews John 4 22. for 't is made with the House of Israel only Jer. 31.31,32 't is only with those in whom the Condition not only required as in that of Works but absolutely promis'd is effectually wrought to wit a putting his fear in their Hearts and writing his Law in their Minds which the Election only obtains And if we enquire after the first giving of this Covenant in Paradice Gen. 3.15 None dare say that God enter'd into a Covenant of Grace with the Seed of the Serpent but only with those whose Heel the Serpent hurteth and it would seem a Mocking of Mankind to make a Covenant with all and not to make it known to the greatest part of them the word of Reconciliation is not preach'd to all Psal 147.19,20 Acts 14.16 16.6 None can be Partaker of the Covenant without Faith and Faith comes by Hearing which the greatest part of the World have not Rom. 10.14,17 Argument 6. If Christ died for his Sheep for his Friends and for his Church only then he dyed not for all but the Antecedent is true therefore the Consequent is true also The Assumption is plain in several Scriptures John 10.11,15 15.13 Acts 20.28 Eth. 5.25 Tit. 2.14 such as were Paul and Titus not such as were Pharaoh and Judas who were Goats and not Sheep Mat. 25.33 Psal 33.12 144.15 Hosea 2.23 Mat. 1.21 his People from their sins John 11.51,52 for the Children of God called Psal 107.2 The redeemed of the Lord. Now seeing those for whom Christ dyed are such as Hear his Voice and follow him to whom He gives Eternal Life John 10.27,28 Such as He sanctifies and cleanses and presents them to himself without spot or wrinkle Eph. 5.23 Such as are Redeemed from all Iniquity to purifie them to himself a peculiar People Titus 2.14 such as are his People his Chosen his Children c. It cannot be intended for all unless we will say either that Pharaoh Judas c. were of the Sheep Friends and Church of Christ or that Christ miss'd of his End intended in his Death Redemption and Remission of Sins are the Inheritance of the Saints and of such as are made Heirs of the Kingdom of Christ Col. 1.12,13,14 'T is true he dyed for Enemies Rom. 5.10 but it was to reconcile them to God such as Paul who had been an Enemy to Christ and the Believing Romans which Christ before that had called Sheep John 10.16 though then not actually converted because in his Eternal Decree he purposed to give them Faith by which they might be gathered to his Fold so that condition to come was already present in the Eternal Purpose for the Father had given them to Christ from all Eternity but Pharoah Judas c. can in no such sense be called the Saints of Christ or Friends of God as Abraham and the Disciples were Argument 7. Quibus intenditur mors Christi ijs applicatur Those for whom Christ's Death was intended to them it must be applied but it is not applied to all therefore it is not intended for all The Proposition is thus proved If the Application of Christ's Death be according to the Intention of God concerning the Latitude and Extent of it then it is applied to all for whom it is intended but the Antecedent is true Ergo c. The Truth of the Antecedent appears thus That which is according to the Will and Purpose of God is according to his Intention but the Application of the Death of Christ is according to the Will and Purpose of God concerning the latitude of it Ergo. The Application of Christ's Death is according to God's Intention as to the Latitude of it The Assumption is proved if the Efficacy of the Means of Grace be according to the Will and Purpose of God concerning the Latitude of it then is also the Application of the Death of Christ c. but the former is true for the good Pleasure and Purpose of God is the Cause ruling and measuring this Efficacy so this Efficacy must be according to God's good Pleasure and Purpose in the Extent of it Mat. 11.26 Rom. 9.15,18 Eph. 1.5,11 proves it sufficiently Ergo the latter must be granted as true also Argument 8. If Christ dyed for all then must all be actually reconciled to God but all are not so Ergo c. The Proposition is proved nothing but sin hinders Reconciliation 2 Cor. 5.19 Rom. 5.19 11.15 Christ's Death merits Reconciliation with God as it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Ransom and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Propitiation so that all for whom Christ died must be reconciled to God for Positâ causâ ponitur et Effectus the Death of Christ is the Cause and Reconciliation the Effect must follow it The Assumption is Evident for then if all be reconciled all must be saved Remissa culpâ remittitur et poena and nothing can be laid to the charge of any take away the Sin and you acquit the Sinner and to grant such an Acquittance and Reconciliation to all brings in many Absurdities Paul rejoyc'd in his Reconciliation by Christ Rom. 5.11 which he would not have done had it been a common Benefit to Herod and Pilate as well as to himself For upon this Hypothesis it follows 1. That Cain Pharaoh c. were reconciled to God by Christ's Death when they were at the time of Christ's dying in the Torments of Hell and never to be delivered from them 2. That God damns reconciled Persons 3. That God takes double Pay for one Fault in punishing both the Surety and the Debtor whereas Nemo bis tenetur pro uno delicto 4. That Christ's reconciling of some is ineffectual c. But
those whom Christ dyes for he gives to them Repentance and Remission of Sins Acts 5.31 Freedom from the slavery of Sin and Regeneration to Newness of Life Rom. 6.5,6 2 Cor. 5.15 Heb. 2.14,15 Jer. 31.33,34 Purifying Grace Acts 15.9 Heb. 9.13,14 and Eternal Life John 10.15,28 those Fruits evidence our Reconciling by Christ's Death Argument 9. Those whom Christ dyed for have the greatest Love of Christ but all have not the greatest Love of Christ Ergo c. The Proposition is clear from John 15.13 and 1 John 3.16 Friends cannot be more loved than by dying for them Herein is the Love of Redemption advanced above the Love of Creation in the latter God gave the Creature to Man but in the former Himself than which no greater Love can be shown The Assumption is clear also for Pilate Judas yea Cain and Pharaoh then in Hell could not have the greatest Love of Christ in his Death seeing the chief Evidence hereof is to give Men Grace here and Glory hereafter Praying for them and Together with himself freely gives us all things Rom. 8.32 all spiritual Blessings Eph. 1.3 Love especially greatest Love is a willing to one the greatest Good which cannot be a common Kindness but special and peculiar Favour Psal 106.4 and 119.132 If Christ willed the greatest Good to Esau how can it be said Esau have I hated yet under this greatest Love of Christ dying for him according to this Hypothesis Argument 10. If Christ dyed for all Mankind and obtained Reconciliation for them then all Infants are reconciled their Sin is forgiven them and so by Consequence are saved dying in their Infancy but this cannot be affirmed of all Infants Ergo c. The Assumption is proved It is the Judgment of the Catholick Church that the Infants of Pagans God 's Secrets being still reserved to himself are destitute of Supernatural and Saving Grace and they are not only born Children of Wrath Eph. 2.3 but are altogether Strangers to the Covenant of Grace and upon this account are esteemed unclean 1 Cor. 7.14 so dying are bound under the damnable guilt of Original Sin This is acknowledged by the Romanists themselves saying Bannez in 1. Quest 23. Parvulos Paganorum filios nihil auxilij supernaturalis recepisse in seipsis but if all were reconciled by Christ's Death then none of them could be born Children of Wrath and subject to the Curse and it would be a Priviledge to them to be kill'd in their Cradles rather than to be kept alive and brought up in Paganism whereby they must undoubtedly perish to all Eternity Besides if all be reconciled then none can be born without the Covenant contrary to Eph. 2.3,12 Argument 11. That cannot be a Truth which the Scripture of Truth no where affirms but it no where asserts that Christ dyed for all Men much less for all and every Man individually between which two there is a vast difference therefore it is not a Truth To explain the Assumption It is true Christ is said to give his Life a Ransom for all but not for all Men or for every Man individually The Scripture is the best Expounder of it self and that All is interpreted to be Many Mat. 20.28 and 26.28 Mark 10.45 and it is so frequently restrained to his Sheep Friends Church Believers Chosen and such as are given to Christ that it must be meant some of all sorts which in equivalent Terms is express'd clearly Rev. 5.9,10 Thou hast redeemed us out of every Kindred and Tongue and People and Nation And I cannot see how the Arminians can have any part in that New Song there mentioned which say they are no more beholden to Christ for their Redemption than Cain and Judas was The Word All therefore must be taken for all the Elect all his Church all his Children that the Father hath given him c. not all Men universally and every Man individually Those places 1 Tim. 2.4,6 Tit. 2.11,14 plainly shew that it is some of all sorts Princes and Peasants Kings and Servants and of such only as he brings to the knowledge of the Truth whereby the Universality of the Expression is plainly restrained in the Connexion of that Clause for God gives not nor so much as offers the Knowledge of Truth to all Argument 12. That which opposes the Attributes of God ought not to be received but the Universal Point doth so Ergo c. The Assumption appears as 1. His Justice Numerari pretium captivum non redimi adversatur Justitiae If Christ paid the Price for Pharaoh and Judas c. then reconciled Souls are unjustly damned ut supra This Hypothesis sets the Death of Christ in a direct Opposition to God's Justice and how could Christ dye for Judas's Sin when Christ's Death was his very Sin as if Christ should say Father receive into thy Favour those whom I know thou wilt never do so being before of old ordained to destruction Jude 4. This is to make Religion a Laughing-stock 2. His Wisdom As if God should love and hate the same Person at the same Time Esau must be loved in giving Christ to dye for him yet hated as being ordain'd to Death from all Eternity and what is this but Childrens play in giving Judas a Ransom with one Hand and sending him to his place for his satisfied-for and remitted Sin with the other Hand 3. His Power If Christ died intentionally as to God for all then God's Intentions are frustrate seeing all are not saved and then he is not Omnipotent if cross'd in his Designs by the Work of his own Hands and to say that Freedom was obtain'd by Christ's Death for one but not that he should be freed is ridiculous Objection 1. It is Objected Impetration is Universal though the Application be not so Christ obtain'd for all though it be not applied to all Answer 1. This Distinction cannot hold true in God who grants nothing but what he bestows for he cannot repent of his Grantings 2. The End cannot be sever'd from the Action if God will'd that Redemption might be obtain'd of him it was that it might be applied to some and if to some and not to all then there is some Disparity in the Impetration it self and in the Intention of it and not in the Application only and so the Distinction falls 3. This Distinction hath no place in the purpose of Christ for therein they are both united Christ's aim being to bestow what he obtains he obtains nothing but what he applies for doth he apply any thing which he did not obtain Deus et Natura nil faciunt frustra 4. It is absurd to say that Redemption is obtained when both he that obtains and he of whom it is obtained do know it shall never be applied nor ever profit those for whom they say it is obtained 5. It bespatters the unvaluable Price of the Blood of God as if Christ should obtain Food for such as were never to be
sed with it and Freedom for those that were never to be freed by it then Christ obtains of his Father that which will never profit this is a goodly Purchase 6. If Christ made God placabilem and not placatum then God is not a pure act neither is he Unchangeable both which Absurdities this Distinction implies 7. Then Christ is only a Preparer but not a Giver of Salvation and he purchas'd a power in that placability for God and not for us contrary to John 1.12 To them he gave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heavenly Honour to become the Sons of God 8. If Christ made God appeaseable only then was Redemption Work like the Cast of a Die an uncertain Thing whether it had been applied to any or no. 9. If we grant a severing of Impetration and Application in some we may suppose a separating them in all and so make Christ to dye in vain and to be such a Mediator as reconciles God to no Body which cannot be 10. If there be an Impetration of Redemption to some without the Application of it then is Christ but an half Mediator to those which is a meer Chimaera and not to be found in Scripture 11. The Intention of God cannot be conditional on our believing for our believing adds nothing to the Intrinsical Sufficiency of Christ's Satisfaction neither doth our not believing diminish it God laid on Christ the Iniquity of us all and made him sin for us from his absolute Will whether we believe or no if otherwise our Act of Faith must perfect the Satisfaction of Christ and caustively make it ours 12. Faith is indeed the Condition of Salvation yet 't is absolutely promised by God and procured by Christ's Death and shall the Application of good obtained depend on a Condition not made known to the Tenth part of the World and not at all to Infants that dye in Infancy 13. This distinction cannot hold true in Infants for they must say Either that they are all damn'd dying in Infancy or that the Impetration of Salvation for them differs not from the Application of it 14. To say That Christ dyed for all and obtained Redemption for all upon this Condition if they do believe is plainly to yield that Christ died for Believers only and to say God grants Redemption if Men do believe is plainly to hold out that the Grant is only to Believers to whom it is given 15. They are both join'd together Rom. 4.25 and 5.18 Isa 53.11,12 Rom. 8.32,33,34 16. Christ's Intercession is that what he obtains may be applied John 17 per totum 17. If there be a Jus there must be a Factum especially where the Condition is equally purchas'd with the Priviledge Objection 2. Quod unusquisque tenetu credere verum est What every One is bound to believe is true but every one is bound to believe that Christ died for them Ergo Answer 1. The Arminians boast much of this Argument as if Achilloean and Invincible suppose we should grant it for Truth would it not be poor Comfort for a distressed Soul to believe that Christ died for it no more than for Judas and for all the Damned in Hell They would still be but miserable Comforters and Physitians of no Value to such a Soul Christ dyed for all thou art a Man Ergo he dyed for thee might comfort Cain and Judas in their Despair 2. But in Truth the Minor of this Argument is false for they to whom the Gospel never came nor have ever heard ought of the Death of Christ are not bound to believe that Christ dyed for them Ubi nulla Lex nulla Transgressio 3. Neither is every One that hath the Gospel bound to believe it absolutely but on this Condition If they be weary and heavy laden with sin such only Christ calls to him and such only are bound to believe not all promiscuously For if Men abide in Impenitency they are bound to believe that the Death of Christ belongs not to them 4. The Agument is a plain Paralogism and a Sophistical Fallacy having Quatuor Terminos four Terms in it for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word believe in the Major Proposition is taken for a fiducial Embracing of the Truth with the Heart which is Faith properly but in the Minor or Assumption it is only a certain Practical Collection which is not Faith but Improperly as if it were the Intention of God that this or that Man suppose Judas c. should believe 5. We are all bound to believe that what God reveals is true and thus saith the Lord is the Object of Faith but God no where reveals or faith that it is his Intention that Judas shall believe or that all should believe 6. The Word Unusquisque is also Vox oequivoca or every One and must have its Limitation to wit every one that is Penitent Hungry Thirsty c. otherwise it could not be Morally and Theologically true for it is revealed that Christ died for Sheep Friends Church only he is the Saviour of the Body Eph. 5.23 7. Christ is a Deed of Gift but this Deed runs not with a Noverint Universi in an Unlimited Sense but it is Omnibus Christi fidelibus I have given and granted upon sundry and certain good Considerations 8. 'T is true the Commission is Go preach the Gospel to every Creature Mark 16.15 and accordingly we hold out a Tender of Christ to all promiscuously but it is not because Christ is intentionally given to all but because we know not the Elect from the Reprobate which is a Secret and Afacto ad jus non valet Consequentia Objection 3. The Word All us'd oft in Scripture must be taken Universally Answer 1. All must not be taken for an Universal Affirmative collectively for every Man individually in the common quoted Scriptures but distributively as in Luke 12.42 Omne Olus is any manner of Herb and Mat. 9.35 Omnem asorbum any kind of Disease for Christ heal'd not every Disease individually and Col. 1.28 where all is taken distributively three times over with Restrictions to those he preach'd to 2. All in 1 Tim. 2.4 cannot be taken for all collectively and for every individual Man for the Word of God forbids us to pray for those that sin the Sin unto Death 1 John 5.16 therefore pray for all Men cannot be taken for all individually 3. All in 1 Tim. 2.4 cannot be taken collectively for then either all shall be saved if God will have it so or God fails of his own Will which is absurd It must therefore be meant not of the Will of his Purpose but of his Precept whereby he invites Men of all sorts and excludes none for there is no Exception in the Gospel We know not the Exception in the Decree hence Paul doubts not to tell the Jaylor who was a bloody Boisterous Fellow that if he believed he should be saved Acts 16.24,27,31 4. The Word 〈◊〉