he should not set free from sin all and every man in the world Furthermore if God shall not justifie and set free all men there will be fraud and folly imputed to God and Christ for where there is fair and honest dealing the buyer and the seller are agreed upon the same terms as if the buyer intendeth to have so many in number be it ten twentie an hundred or a thousand the seller intendeth the same number also and the same persons or else there is fraud in the one and folly in the other now Christ is the purchaser and if he intended by his death to ransom all men then God the Father must intend the same and must justifie and deliver from wrath even all men He must in justice deliver as many as Christ bought and the same persons that is all men in the world or else you impute fraud and folly to God and to Christ I shall inlarge my self upon this last Argument by descending to some particulars as thus If God shall not justifie and save eternally Judas Pharaoh Cain Corah and his wicked company for whom Christ died as say Arminians then he shall be very unjust this I thus prove If Christ died for Judas Pharaoh and other abominable wicked men then have they suffered in this life the full wrath of God for all their sins and have made a sufficient and perfect satisfaction to Gods justice already here for though they suffered not in this life in their own persons yet if it be true that Christ died for them then they suffered in the person of Christ when in this life he died on the Cross for them which is to be reckoned as their own death and suffering This I thus prove Look what a mans surety performs for him that is reckoned as done by himself as in case my surety payeth my debt it is reckoned as my payment for thereby I am discharged So if Christ paid the debt of Judas Pharaoh and the rest it is as if they had paid it in their own persons and so they must be discharged Hence it follows That since Judas and others have suffered in the person of Christ which is to be reckoned as their own suffering 1. That Judas and Pharaoh have made a full and perfect satisfaction to Gods justice for all their sins having suffered in this life the second death and hell with the pains thereof or what is equivalent thereunto 2. That God must in justice justifie and save this wicked crue eternally or else he will be an unjust Judge for he shall punish one sin twice once in Christ the suretie and once again in Judas the principal So much for proof of my Major as for my Minor it needs no proof it being so clear Answer Arminians do answer thus to my Major That it followeth not that if Christ died for all men then God must justifie and save all men for God may interpose the condition of faith to go between Christs death for Judas and others and the act of Gods justification and so as though Christ died for all men yet God will not justifie any of them unless they first believe Reply 1 It is absurd to suppose that God would put in a condition after he hath taken a ransom and payment of a full price Conditions are always made before the price is payd but never after the price is paid and received what man that selleth house or land doth put in a condition after he hath received his money Wherefore since Arminians will not have the condition of Faith to go before Christs death it is too late to put in this condition after Christs death for by his death the ransom and price is fully paid and received paid by Christ and received by God the Father 2 If Christ died for Judas and all men considered absolutely as sinners and without faith as Arminians hold then God the Father must justifie Judas and all men considered absolutely as sinners and without Faith and so the condition of Faith cannot be interposed for the Buyer and Seller if there be fair dealings between them so as one doth not over-reach the other are both agreed upon the same terms so as if the Buyer purchaseth and payeth the price without any condition then the Seller that takes the price must give up the thing bought and paid for without any condition and so God cannot be said to put in the condition of Faith between Christs death and the act of justification 3 Since Arminians hold that Christ died for all men as sinners and without the condition of Faith God cannot in justice require the condition of Faith before he will justifie them for if he shall require it then many thousands for whom Christ died dying without Faith must be damned and suffer for their sins eternally in the next life now if Christ died for them in this life and suffered for them and in their room stead and place then God shall be unjust to punish these men for their sins in the next life though they die without faith for so he shall punish one sin twice once in Christ their suretie and once in themselves the principal Since Judas hath suffered for his sins in the person of Christ in this life God shall be an unjust Judge to punish Judas for his sins in the next life though he hath no faith for God hath as they say punished Judas his sins in the person of Christ and therefore he shall be unjust to punish him also in his own person It is extream injustice to require a debt both of the suretie and also of the principal wherefore Judas his debt being paid to God by Christ God cannot in justice require the condition of Faith of him so as for want of it to damn him and to cause him to suffer for his sins in the next life and so to pay his own debt in his own person for so God should require one debt to be twice paid and so you see that the condition of faith cannot be interposed betwixt Christs death and justification being that God in justice must justifie and set free from the debt of punishment all those men whose debt Christ hath paid whether they believe or not believe when God looks upon Judas as having suffered in the person of Christ he cannot but see his justice fully satisfied and therefore cannot but justifie and free him believing or not believing wherefore to interpose the condition of Faith is to make God an unjust Judge 4 I shall here add one thing which will both strengthen my Major and also confute their answer They say Christ died for all men and therefore they must so generally understand the Text 2. Cor. 5.15 which saith He died for all c. now all those who Christ died for those he reconciled to God his father He is the reconciliation not for our sins onely but also for the sins if the whole world 1. John 2.2 And all
those who Christ died for 2. Cor. 5.15 God the Father reconciled unto himself 2. Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ and reconciled the world to himself that is God was in Christ when he died on the Cross for the sins of all men and reconciled them unto himself now as God reconciled all men or the world so he justified them all for the Text saith He did not impute their sins unto them 2. Cor. 5.19 Furthermore reconciliation doth presuppose justification to go before for the partie offended is not said to be reconciled untill he hath first forgiven the offence and the offender So then the world which Christ died for the same world God justified thus you see my Major confirmed Next to confute their answer Faith cannot be interposed betwixt Christs death and Gods justification so as to hinder any man for whom Christ died from justification because those whom Christ died for 1. John 2.2 2. Cor. 5.15 those God justified not imputing their sins unto them 2. Cor. 5.19 and those God reconciled unto himself 2. Cor. 5.19 so Faith cannot be any condition so as to hinder any man by want of it for whom Christ died from justification because all those Christ died for all those God reconciled and justified if Christ died for Judas then God justified Judas yet Judas had no faith interposed betwixt Impetration and Application for he was no believer If Arminians say Christ died for all men then Paul saith God justified all men and I may say God justifieth them whether they believe or not believe for faith cannot be interposed So much for my fourth Argument ARGUM. V. If Christ died for all men then God the Father loved all men and that with a special and incomparable love My reason here is Because God the Father gave his Son yea his onely Son to death for them now for a Father to deliver up to death his Son yea his onely Son for a man this bewrays love to that man yea matches love See a text for it John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son c. What greater love than this did ever God shew to the world than when he gave his onely begotten Son to die for them But God the Father did not love all men with a special and incomparable love This I thus prove Because there are and ever were many unbelieving wicked and impenitent men in the world who lived and died in Gods hatred I have loved Jacob and have hated Esau Rom. 9.13 and see Rom. 9.22 The wicked and him that loveth iniquitie doth his soul hate Psal 11.5 Thou hatest them that work iniquitie Psal 5.5 6. Therefore Christ did not die for all men To avoid the strength of this Argument Arminians perhaps will answer thus That God loved all men as sinners but hateth them as impenitent sinners c. Hereunto I reply That this is a distinction unheard of and no where grounded in the Scriptures that I know of and therefore it is to be rejected That God loveth all men as his creatures may pass as a sound position but that God loveth all men as sinners and that with an incomparable and matchles love is to me most unsound for a thing considered as evil is no object of love but of hatred and so much for my fifth Argument Thus I have by five Arguments proved That Christ died not for all men and so I have finished the first thing propounded at the beginning and now I come to the second which is to make answer unto the Texts of Scripture brought by Arminians to prove That Christ died for all men An Answer unto the Texts alleadged by Arminians to prove an Universal Redemption JOHN 3.16 God so loved the world that he gaue his onely begotten Son c. BY this Text Arminians would prove that Christ died for all men and for this end they urge the word world in the Text which they will needs have generally and universally taken so as to signifie all men in the world whether good or bad believers or unbelievers and so as Christ should die for all men in the largest sense Answer 1 I take it for a great weakness in Arminians to build so confidently upon the word world urging that it must be generally taken here for all men in the world who knoweth not that knows any thing in Scripture that general words are very often used by holy pen-men particularly The general word all is often used particularly for some or for many as in Matth. 3.5 1. Cor. 1.5 and 13.2 7. and 9.25 and 6.12 and 10.23 33. many examples may be given for other words also but passing by them I shall instance in the word in question The word world is sometime taken for all men in the world as in Rom. 5.12 and sometime it is taken for all men in the world excepting eight persons as in 2. Pet. 3.6 1. Pet. 3.20 The world that then was perished over-flowed with water and sometime it is taken for the most men in the world as in 2. Cor. 4.4 John 15.18 19. and 17.9 The God of this world hath blinded the minds c. and sometime it is taken for the lesser number of men in the world as in Acts 17.6 John 12.19 These are they which have subverted the state of the world And Behold the world goeth after him Now since this word is so variously used how can they be so confident as to averr that it must be taken in the largest sense My answer therefore is that as the word world is sometime taken for the lesser number of men in the world which are Disciples and followers of Christ as in John 12.19 so it may be taken also in their Text alleadged John 3.16 for believers who are the lesser number of this world and this is my first Answer 2 I shall prove that the word world is used for believers onely and then it will follow that as there is a world of the wicked so there is a world of believers also for this end See John 1.29 Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world Though Arminians say that Christ this Lamb of God died for the sins of the world and for all men by way of Impetration yet they hold that Christ hath not justified or procured justification for all men in the world by way of Application nor for any men but for believers onely now this Text speaks of Taking away the sins of the world which is no less than to procure Justification and to make Application of Christs death by freeing men from their sins and therefore this text is not to be understood of the world of all men but of believers onely and of the world of believers for no mens sins are Taken away but believers onely see 2. Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ and reconciled the world unto himself not imputing their sins unto them Here the world that were reconciled
many hundreds of weak Christians neither can nor dare say Christ is mine or Christ died for me in particular 2. I judge that this act or kind of faith is a consequent of justifying faith and may safely and comfortably be concluded and collected by strong Christians from it thus He that hath justifying faith Christ is his and Christ died for him But I in particular have justifying faith for I believe that Christ is the Son of God and the Saviour of the world and my faith is accompanied with good works as Sanctification and Mortification c. Therefore Christ is mine and Christ died for me in particular So much for clearing of my Answer and so much also for answer to their argument By this time we have finished these things propounded to be handled First we have by sundrie Arguments proved That Christ died not for all men Secondly we have answered all their Texts of Scripture and their Argument whereby they would prove the contrary Now in the third place we confute a common answer of Arminians which they give to a notable objection of ours The Confutation of a common Answer of Arminians which they give to a notable Objection of ours FIrst I shall propound our Objection Secondly I shall give you the Arminian answer And Thirdly I shall confute it in my Reply Objection If Christ died for Judas and all other wicked and ungodly men why are they not all saved how can any be damned for whom Christ died for if Christ died for them then have they suffered in this life in the person of Christ their suretie the torments of the next life which Christ upon the Cross bore for them and in their room and place now God having punished Judas and the rest in the person of Christ on the Cross in this life with the punishment due to the next life he cannot punish them again in the next life unless he be an unjust Judge punishing the same men for the same sins twice once in this life and once more in the next life and therefore Iudas and all other men must be saved if Christ died for all men Answer Hereunto Dutch and English Arminians both make this answer Iudas and the rest will not believe they refuse to believe in Christ and so to apply him and therefore God may justly damn them Joh. 3.18 Mark 16.16 see their Acta Synodalia de Morte Christi pag. 320. and this they endeavour to clear by some similitudes If a Physician tenders a potion to a patient he is not to be blamed if the patient will not receive it and apply it but the fault and blame is onely in the patient So if God offers Christ to Iudas and all other wicked men but they will not believe in him and apply him then the blame is theirs and so God is free of injustice though he damn them An other simily is this A King having many subjects in captivity under a forreign King payes a full and sufficient ransom for every one of them now many of those captives despise their liberty and chuse to live in captivity and bondage In this case there is no blame in the King but in the captives onely So God and Christ have ransomed all men but many men despise this ransom by refusing to believe and so choose to live in captivity and thraldom still wherefore if God keep them under everlasting thraldom he is not unjust or blameable but these despisers onely are blameable Reply I shall first deal with their answer and then with their similitudes I begin with their answer 1 Be it so that Judas doth not and will not believe but obstinately refuseth to believe yet this freeth not God of injustice if he damn Judas supposing that Christ died for Judas for clearing of this I ask Arminians whether Christ died for men considered as believers or as sinners and unbelievers Hereunto they will not say as believers for so they should justifie our Doctrine which is that Christ died for believers and for them onely wherefore they must answer that Christ died for men considered as sinners and without belief and so faith is no condition of impetration or of Christs death and ransom paid for men now if Christ impetrating and paying a ransom for men did it absolutely and without any condition or consideration of faith in them then for application God the Father cannot require faith in men before application or before he will apply Christ his death unto them in justification unless they will absurdly think that Christ and God were not of one and the same mind but were at odds and difference in the work of Redemption as if Christ should buy and purchase us absolutely without a condition but God should sell us upon a condition so absurdly they should think the buyer and seller should be at odds and not agreed both upon the same terms now since it must follow that if Christ died for Iudas without respect to faith in him then God cannot but justifie and save Iudas without regard to faith in him then though Judas doth not believe and wilfully refuseth to believe yet God cannot in justice damn him for his not believing because when Christ bought Iudas of God the Father and God the Father sold Iudas to Christ there was no condition of faith intended betwixt them and therefore Iudas must be saved If you say that Christ died for Iudas then God cannot require faith of him so as he should for his infidelity in justice damn punish him in the next life God cannot be so unjust as to punish one man twice for his sins as once in Christ his surety and once again in himself the principal one debt must not be twice payed wherefore to alleadge a reason from Iudas his unbelief why God may damn him in the next life is to alleadge a reason why God may deal unjustly in the next life Now what they should say to this I cannot devise unless they will distinguish of Iudas his sins and so make an hotchpotch of the work of Redemption saying that Christ died for some of Iudas his sins but not for all as not for his unbelief and then it will follow that Christ is made an half Saviour or a partial Saviour and Christ died for some of Iudas his sins and Iudas dieth for other some of his sins and Christ died for all Iudas his sins save that one of unbelief and Iudas is now in Hell for no sins committed but suffers onely for one sin namely his unbelief these are absurd and groundless fantasies never broched by any Christian man unless Arminians will be the first 2. So saying they contradict themselves For if Christ died not for unbelief then he died not for all men for many men are unbelievers 2. Thes 3.2 Christs death was for believers or for unbelievers we say it was for believers ergo they must hold that it was for unbelievers So much touching their answer and
now I come to their similitudes and first to that of a Physician 1 This simily of a Physician is altogether impertinent to their purpose for by this simily it is cleared that God in justice may damn Judas once because he refuseth to believe but it doth not clear that which is in question which is that God in justice may damn Judas twice for his sin of unbelief that is once in his surety Christ and once more in his own person this is high injustice no similitudes may or can make God to be unjust If the patient refuseth to receive and apply the potion he is to bear the blame but it is not so in Judas if he refuseth to believe and apply Christ because if Christ died for Judas absolutely and without respect to his belief or unbelief as Arminians say then he is not bound to believe in Christ as a means to free him from damnation for Christ hath already suffered his damnation for him before God the Father required any faith in him when he died for him considered as a sinner or unbeliever so Judas is not to be blamed for not believing since Christ in dying for him and in his room required or respected no faith in him and it is too late for God the Father to require the condition of faith in him after he hath punished him and his sin in Christ Further though in Physick the patient is to apply the potion to avoid death yet it is not so in the potion of Christs death to free us from death for here man is to do nothing but to be passive if Christ died for all unbelievers but it is God who is to make application to apply Christs death to men whether they believe or believe not because he received and accepted Christs death for all men believers or not believers in what condition Christ gave himself for men in such condition God received Christ for men 1 Though a Physician tenders a potion to his patient so as he refuseth to apply it he must die yet it is not so to be applied as if God tendered Christ upon the condition of faith so as if they refuse to believe they must be damned for it is absurd to think or say that after God had received and accepted of Christ and his death for men without any condition at all be it faith or any other he should afterwards require a condition or tender Christ upon a condition of faith God having received Christs death for men without condition he hath no tender to make unto men now but to tender them justification glorification and freedom from condemnation this or nothing is to be tendered for after God hath punished and damned a man in Christ it is most absurd to think he should then require of him faith as a condition and means to free him from damnation Thus much for the simile of a Physiciaâ— 2 As for the other simile of a King and the Captives this is also impertinent for 1. Be it so that Judas and other captives do despise Christs ransom and faith the means of it yet this will not clear God of injustice if he punish Judas twice once in Christ his suretie and once again in his own person no simile can make God unjust or to punish one man or one sin twice God in justice may punish Judas his dispising once as in Christ or in Judas but not twice as in Christ and in Judas both 2. This simile is unfit for the purpose and therefore to be rejected if it were fitted to our question it should be thus framed A King having many subjects in captivity to a forreign King pays their ransom by his son who is put into captivitie for them and lies there in their room but they despise their libertie choose to live in captivitie still wherefore the forreign King may keep both the Kings son and the captives also in prison and captivitie can the forreign King do this injustice So much for their second similitude I cannot imagine what Arminians should say to evade these things unless they will coyn a new distinction and strange to Christian ears and so make a hotchpotch of the work of Redemption saying that Christ died for some of a mans sins but not for all his sins as not for his final unbelief or new infidelitie or infidelitie unrepented of as they express it and then they think to evade all by this answer that God punished Christ for all Judas his sins excepting his infidelitie and punished Judas for his infidelitie and so God punisheth no sin twice nor is he unjust But to this new distinction I thus reply 1 It maketh Christ to be but a partial Saviour or an half Saviour for by this distinction they say Christ died for some or many of a mans sins but not for all for not for unbelief 2. It maketh Christ to die for some of Judas his sins and Judas himself to die for other some of his sins 3. It maketh Judas and other wicked men and unbelievers to suffer hell torments for none of all their horrible and abominable sins committed in their life time but onely for their final unbelief for they say Christ died and suffered for all their other sins Now to say that wicked men do not suffer in hell for their other horrible sins besides infidelitie is not onely absurd but manifestly false as is to be seen Matth. 25.41 42 43. John 5.29 Rom. 2.6 8 9. Jude 7. Revel 21.8 where we see that wicked men suffer in hell for their unmercifulness contention unrighteousness fornication murther sorcerie idolatrie and lyes so you see they can make no evasion but by coyning of a new distinction which makes an hotchpotch of the work of Redemption and is not onely absurd but also manifestly false as is proved 2. If Christ died not for new infidelitie then he died not for all men for many believe not after invitation by the Gospel preached which they call new infidelitie Iohn 12.37 So much for confutation of the Arminian answer saying to us that therefore God may justly damn Judas because he will not believe Now their answer being confuted our objection remains good namely that if Christ died for all men then it follows that no man shall be damned but that Judas and all men shall be saved And so I come to the fourth and last thing propounded to be handled which is A Confutation of their distinction of Impetration and Application The distinction of Impetration and Application confuted FIrst we must know what Arminians understand by these terms By impetration they understand the death and passion of Christ whereby he merited remission of sins and justification for all men By application they understand the fruit and benefit of Christs death and passion which is as I conceive it must be the real and actual remission of sins and justification applied unto the faithfull The former namely Impetration is proper to God the Son
is to punish twice over for the same sins which is an act of injustice in God now this must be so if you distinguish of impetration and application in such sort as they concurr not in the same persons but are divided so as impetration belongs unto unbelievers but application belongs not to them for if application and justification belongs not to them then they must suffer punishment for their sins in the next life and so God shall be unjust for after he hath punished unbelievers in Christ their suretie he shall punish them again in their own persons so you see impetration and application are not to be distinguished in respect of persons as if the one belonged to some persons but not the other unless you will make God to be an unjust Judge 3 I shall confute this distinction by a Text of Scripture understanding it in the Arminian sence see 2. Cor. 5.15 19. In verse 15. speaking of Christ and his death it saith one died for all c. Here I understand the word all in the Arminian sense and then in verse 19. it speaketh again of Christ and his death saying God was in Christ that is in Christ upon the Cross when he died for all and reconciled the world unto himself not imputing their sins unto them So here you have the impetration of Christs death and the application of it in reconciliation and not imputation of sins now here application is made as large as impetration and to belong unto the same persons without distinction or division for those all which Christ died for were all of them reconciled to God and justified their sins not being imputed unto them the same world which Christ died for John 3.16 the same was reconciled and had no sins imputed to them So S. Paul did not allow of this Arminian distinction and division of impetration and application in the Arminian sense so as impetration should be understood more largely for persons than application or as if impetration had been for all men and application but for some men 4 This distinction is guiltie yet of another absurditie for it makes the means of faith to be used altogether too late and so to become an unprofitable and frivolous means for Arminians make faith to be a means to avoid an evil after the evil is past They say Christ by his impetration suffered the evil of death for unbelievers now in as much as Christ suffered death and bore the evil of punishment of unbelievers for them and in their stead and room they themselves have suffered death and bore the evil of punishment in the person of Christ now after unbelievers have born the evil of punishment it is too late to use faith as a means to obtain application and justification and a freedom from the evil of punishment for thus they should use a means to avoid an evil after the evil is past and so the means of faith is made unprofitable and frivolous wherefore should I use any means to avoid imprisonment when my Suretie hath suffered imprisonment for me were not means in this case frivolous If Christ did impetrate and die for Iudas and in his stead then Iudas hath suffered death by his Suretie Christ what need then is there of faith in Judas as a means to obtain application and freedom from death after he hath suffered death as by his Suretie This is as if a Judge should hang a man for his offence and then require him to use means to free himself from death And so much for confutation of this distinction of Impetration and Application FINIS
the latter namely Application is proper unto God the Father Furthermore they place Faith between Impetration and Application so as though Christ died and impetrated for all men yet God justifies and makes application of Christs death unto believers onely now the better to help on the matter they say that these being acts of grace and favour God may according to his infinite wisdom order them according to his most free will the which words as I take it are spoken in relation to Faith that God may place it before or after impetration as it pleaseth his wisdom Having thus opened their meaning I thus proceed As for this distinction of Impetration and Application I acknowledge it for as it is Christ that died or impetrated for us so it is God that justifieth us and makes application of Christs death unto us Rom. 8.33 And I am content that they call what Christ did for us on the Cross Impetration and what God doth for us in relation to it and by virtue of it Application but I mislike of their division that they should divide the works of Christ and God so as if Christ should impetrate and die for many men to whom God makes no application of Christs death for they say Christ impetrated for all men believers and unbelievers but God applies Christs death for justification to believers onely now thus the Works of Christ and God do not concurr in the same persons but are divided for God makes no application unto many men for whom Christ made impetration On the contrary we hold that the works of God the Father and God the Son are undivided distinguished they may be but divided they may not be they always concurr as touching the same persons to whomsoever God makes application to and for those and none other Christ made impetrations and for whomsoever Christ impetrated to those and to all those God makes application And as touching faith we hold that as God respecteth faith in application so Christ respecteth faith in impetration so as faith is precedent in both and so God and Christ had respect unto the same persons and unto the same qualification of the persons but that faith is to come between impetration and application is but an Arminian devise dividing the consideration and respects of God and Christ of the Father and the Son about one and the same work of Redemption and so I come to the Confutation 1 For the absurdnes of this distinctiō of impetration and application the Arminian devise of faith coming between them as a condition of the latter onely put case that a King having subjects in thraldom and captivity under a forreign King and to ransom redeem them he sends his onely Son to lay in bondage and captivity for them and in their stead and place and this the King doth without any condition at all to be performed by his subjects If now the forreign King refuseth to deliver set free the subjects unless they will perform some condition first which he imposeth upon them and which their own King never required of them in sending his Son nor did his Son go into captivity for them upon any such condition is it not absurd to imagine that the forreign King should require a condition to be performed by the subjects before he will apply the ransom to them and set them free it must needs be absurd for you must imagine folly ignorance in the one King or fraud and deceit in the other King in that they were not first agreed both on the same terms before the son was put into captivity So is the case if Faith goeth between impetration and application and if Christ died for men absolutely without the condition of Faith and yet God will require the condition of Faith before he will make application set men free from their sins and condemnation I know nothing they have to say to free themselves of this absurdity but this that both the Kings Christ and God were at the first agreed on the same terms as thus they both agreed that Christ should impetrate and die for all men absolutely without consideration of any faith in them but that God should apply Christs death to none but believers or to such as did first believe To this I reply that this occasion is guilty of these absurdities 1 That the King should put his onely son to live in thraldom and bondage and his son should willingly endure all this misery for millions even the greater number of his subjects in captivity whom he foresaw and knew well should not be a rush the better for it because they would not keep the condition agreed on Will any wise man give and pay a certain price certainly for an uncertain possession be it of house or land much less will any pay aforehand for that land or house which he foresees he shall never enjoy yet such a purchaser they make Christ to be by this agreement The absurdness also of this may appear by this simile Abraham bought of the Hittites for 400 shekels of silver a field to bury his wife in and upon the payment of the mony the field was delivered to him for a possession Gen. 23.16 c. now is it not absurd to imagine that Abraham and the Hittites should both be agreed that Abraham should buy and pay for the field absolutely without any condition but yet the Hittites should require a condition to go between paying and possession and before Abraham should have possession and without it no possession where a condition is required it always goes before payment never after or between payment and possession so though they in words ascribe wisdom to God saying that God may according to his infinite wisdom order Faith to go before or after impetration yet in this case indeed they impute absurdness and folly to God in puting the condition of Faith after the price of Christs death The case is the same in buying a thing as Abraham did for himself or for a mans friend or friends as Christ did 1 They say Christs intention was by his death to save all men even unbelievers in Acta Synodalia pag. 344. now for Christ to agree with God to put in a condition of Faith after impetration is a contradiction and crossing of his intension for by his death he intended to save unbelievers but by agreeing to require Faith of unbelievers or they to be denied salvation he foreseing they would not and should not believe intended not to have them saved for he agreed to a condition which barred them from salvation so much for the absurdity of this agreement 2 An other absurdity in the distinction is this It maketh God to be an unjust Judge for Christ by his impetration and dying for the sins of unbelievers hath born the punishment of their sins for them in this life now for God to punish unbelievers for their sins in the next life as he will Mark 16.16