knowledge shall he perish c. But he nevea saith destroy not him or by thy knowledge shall he perish whom God hath Elected but contrarily Christ saith if it were possible they would deceive the very Elect. 6. We find them that fall away described to be such as were sanctified by the blood of the Covenant but never to be such as were Elected to Salvation And their Sin is aggravated as being a treading under foot the Son of God and putting him to open shame but not as treading under foot Gods Election And their misery is in this that there is no more Sacrifice for Sin but a fearful looking for of Judgment 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 Salvation and they shall speed worse at Judgment than Sodom and Gomorrhah But none are so threatned for sinning against Election nor are they warned to take heed of rejecting it nor is it said how shall we escape if we neglect so great a mercy as Election Also men that unworthily receive the Sacrament are said to eat and drink damnation to themselves and to be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord But no Man that is not Elect is said either to be the cause of his own Non Election or to be guilty of abusing or rejecting his Election 8. Also I find men warned on pain of Damnation to receive Christ as their Redeemer Be they never so wicked it is our office to perswade them to this and therefore to preach the Gospel to every Creature But we are not to command men to take God for their Elector I may not go to all the ignorant prophane men men in the Countrey and charge them to take God for their Elector 9. We must command all men to love Christ as their Redeemer and be thankful to him and in thankfulness to obey him and we may say to them You are not your own you are bought with a price therefore glorifie God with your Bodies and Spirits for they are his But we cannot perswade all men to love God as their Elector or to be thankful to him for Election or to obey God because he hath chosen them 10. We find Scripture telling us how hardly flesh and blood will digest the Doctrine of predestination and how they will quarrel at Gods chosing one and not another and how God stops their mouths with an answer drawn from his absolute Lordship and Propriety over them as the Potter over the clay he may make them vessels of honour or dishonour and do with his own as he list But we never find any murmurrings of Flesh and Blood that Christ should die for one man and not for another Nor do we find God ever acknowledging any such thing much less giving them a reason from his Absolute Dominion 11. Besides we find God useth to give the reason why men be not saved by Christ from their own wilfulness and rebellious rejecting him This is the cause given why his blood is not applyed to them But when it comes matter of Election or Non-Election the Answer is Oh Man Who art thou that disputest against God So that all these things laid together and considered it seems to me clear that Redemption is a Universal Cause as Creation is and not a thing proper to the Elect only as Gods Election is and that on this Universal Ground of Redemption Christ is entitled the Redeemer of the World and hath founded his jus Dominii imperii his right of Propriety and Government over all even those That will not that he should Reign over them as God was called the Creator of the World because he Created them and on that ground did found his first Title of Dominion and Empire over all the World And that Redemption hath no more an infallible connexion to the Salvation of all the Redeemed as subsequent than Creation hath with the Salvation of all the Created But both Creation and Redemption as they are the means between Election and its End have an infallible connexion with the consequent of the Salvation of the Elect. 2. It is a rule of great use and approved generally by Divines that when texts seem contradictory one to another or several interpretations and opinions are contradictory indeed that we must ever reduce uncertainties to certainties and not contrarily certainties to uncertainties and we must interpret obscure texts by reducing them to the plain ones and not the plain ones by reducing them to the obscure This rule Dr. Sanderson presseth well And Augustine said excellently Shall we deny that which is plain because we cannot comprehend that which is hid and secret Shall we say that is not so which we see to be so because we cannot find why it is so Aug. l. de bono persever c. 14 O that this rule were better observed When God telleth us as plain as can be spoken that Christ died for and tasted death for every man men will deny it and to that end subvert the plain sense of the words meerly because they cannot see how this can stand with Christs damning men and with his special Love to his chosen It is not hard to see 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 opinions of theirs as plainly as it saith that Christ died for all and every man Doth it say as plainly any where that he died not for all Doth it any where except any one man and say Christ died not for him Doth it say any where that he died only for his Sheep or his Elect and exclude the Non-Elect There is no such word in all the Bible Should not then the certain truths and the plain texts be the Standard to the uncertain points and obscure texts Also Divines generally make it a rule for the Interpretation of Scripture that we must not leave the most obvious plain sense of the words without necessity and clear compelling evidence Now then let them be viewed by any unprejudiced man and let him tell us what is the plain and obvious sense of these foresaid words And for my part I see no necessity of going from that plain sense Some here
who are true spiritual Members of the same as to be Saints Elect Redeemed c. Answ 1. All professed Christians are Saints by separation from the World to the Church Visible and Elect or chosen to that Condition 2. Scripture speaks thus of none but those that seem to be such the Penmen of Scripture therein speaking of men that knew not the heart 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 Condemnation 4. Why else may not we still use this Language if it be true that it is the perpetual course of Scripture Be not then offended with us if we write and say that Christ redeemed by his blood all professed Christians Nay then we might say Julian was a Saint Elect and so was Judas c. 5. I would our Brethren of the separation would speak in the same Language when they are judging of Church-Members and Communicants as they do when they use these Arguments against Christs Universal Ransom or at least come near to this charitable vein laying by the delusory part 2. But the great prop of this Cause is that they will prove from other Texts that the Scripture speaketh thus And three Texts I find urged and I may safely say sadly abused The first is Mat. 27. 53. Hierusalem is called the Holy City because it was so in esteem and appearance saith my Author Answ Must we needs take his bare word for this when we know it was Holy by Gods own separation of it from the rest of the World for the principal place of his publick Worship and residence of his Church and Priests and so denominated by himself What Man then will believe that it was called Holy meerly from the Peoples professing to be Holy 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 blinded Pharisees Answ 1. The words seem to speak only of the Jews accusation of him i. e. what they charged him to have done and not what he did therefore they sought to lay hands on him not only because he had broken the Sabbath c. 2. Distinguish between breaking the rest of the Sabbath naturally by Natural actions contrary to rest but without sin and breaking it morally by sin The former way Christ did break the Sabbath the latter he did not take this distinction from Christ himself who tells you that the Priests in the Temple brake the Sabbath viz. the external rest of it by labour and are blameless and therefore broke it not morally But the Text that I find alledged most frequently and confidently by very many Learned Men is 2 Chron. 28. 23. and I desire God to forgive me that in my ignorance I have oft so abused it my self The words are these For he Sacrificed to the Gods of Damascus that smote him and he said because the Gods of the King of Syria help them therefore will I sacrifice to them that they may help me The last words are confess'd to be the false words of the deluded Idolater Ahaz but all the question is of the former words which are the words of the Holy Ghost He Sacrificed to the Gods of Damascus that smote him where by supine oversight 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 Damascus It was Damascus that smote him and not the Gods of Damascus according to the Text. Tremelius and Junius render it thus plainly Sacrificavit enim Diis Damascenorum percutientium ipsum not Diis Damascenorum percutientientibus ipsum And would one think now that so great a stress should be laid by prudent sober men on such an oversight Darmesek being a collective the Cities name put for the Peoples than which nothing more usual when there is mention of the acts of Cities and Countries did truly smite Ahaz As England did smite Scotland Or Rome conquered so much of the World And Venice holds War with the Turk 2. What if it had been otherwise May not God give power to those Devils which were the Gods of Damascus really to smite Ahaz As well as he gave the Devil power to smite Job a better man 3. And what if all that they supposed of this Text had been true If God had spoke in so strange a language once in all the Bible If we shall thence take liberty to interpret him so elsewhere without proving this to be the sense we may then indeed make any thing of the Scripture And though I doubt not but God in mercy will bear with the weakness of good men that by the power of prejudice do run on such expositions having a zeal for God though not according to knowledge and supposing 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 invasion of Popery to conceit a necessity of an Earthly final Judge of the sense of Scripture as being insufficient to manifest its own sense In the mean time how do we gratifie Papists and Scepticks by this dealing But inded the Text is plain though I confess the Septuagint and some Translators might give occasion to some of this common mistake The sixth Text that I shall alledge is Heb. 6. 4 5 6. For it is impossible for those who were once inlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the World to come if they shall fall away to renew them again to Repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to open shame Here these Apostates are said to crucifie the Son of God afresh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not barely to crucifie Christ again but to crucifie him to themselves again That is either finaliter as some expound it or efficienter as others which way soever it be it is not efficaciter but quantum in se 1. If it be the first then the meaning is this If such be saved then it must be by a new Sacrifice and so they bring themselves into that case that Christs Death on the terms that first it was accepted will not serve to save them because he died not to satisfie for that sin So Paraeus expoundeth it sed quomodo hoc faciendo Christum denuò crucifigunt sibimetipsis Quia filium Dei semel crucifixum abnegando nolunt salvari ejus morte ex qua sola dependet resipiscentia salus Si igitur resipiscere servari deberent denuò crucifigendus esset eis Christus quod est impossibile quia amplius mori non potest Sic infra
Salvation but God offers no other Pardon or Salvation but what is purchased by Christ's Blood He that tells us there neither is nor can be any other Remission or Salvation but what Christ purchaseth will not offer any other to men and urge them to accept it yea Pardon and Life as purchased by Christ are in Gods deed of gift together with Christ himself conditionally bestowed on all even if they will have them a Condition which among men is seldom thought worthy the name of a Condition it being supposed in nature that every man is willing of his own good and so of all excellent advantages thereto Is all this so with those in Hell Christ is neither given nor Pardon and Life offered to them they are not commanded to repent and believe to this end that they may be justified and saved But those on Earth are and therefore their Pardon and Salvation is possible for God will not command them to seek or to accept of an impossibility and then Condemn them for not seeking and not accepting it If the Damned could repent or believe it would not save them but it would save them on Earth Nor is their belief it self such an impossibility as is the Damneds believing Moreover Christ saith now how oft would I have gathered you But he would not gather the Damned God would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth but he saith not that he would have the Damned to be saved This Life is called the day of their Visitation the day of grace the acceptable time the day of Salvation and they are called on to hear the voice of God to day while it is called to day and not to harden their hearts least he swear in his wrath that they shall not enter into his rest that is least their case become desperate and their Salvation impossible therefore it was not so before They are warned to take heed least sinning wilfully after the knowledge of the truth there remain no more Sacrifice for Sin c. Implying that before there is a Sacrifice for their sin it is said that it is impossible to renew them by repentance who tread under foot the blood of the Covenant and do despight to the Spirit of Grace implying that before it was not impossible and also that they might have had if they had not a share in that blood and that Spirit They have a promise left them of entring into his rest Heb. 4 1. and a Salvation proclaimed to them and if they perish it will be for neglecting so great Salvation Heb. 3. 2. They are invited to come in because all things are ready they are commanded to seek the Lord while he may be found and call upon him while he is near None of this is so with the Damned God is not near them nor may be found of them nor have they any day of Grace Visitation or Salvation where the word is preached it is that they might be saved 1 Thes 2. 16. Paul sought the profit of many and to please all men that they might be saved 1 Cor. 10. 33. Even when men are delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh it is that the Spirit might be saved 1 Cor. 5. 5. yea God sent his Son into the World that the World thro him might be saved that World which consisteth of Believers and Unbelievers Joh. 3. 16. 17. when Jesus was proving his Mediatorship to the Jews he saith These things I say that ye might be saved Joh. 5. 34. so that Mens Salvation is possible while they are on Earth till they have sinned against the Holy Ghost or totally Apostatiz'd by abrenunciation of Christ else what business have Preachers with them Why do we intreat them to be reconciled to God Do we not tell them daily and truly that yet there is time yet there is hope and advise them to take time while they have it and let not slip the Day of Grace and Salvation 2 Cor. 6. 1 2. We beseech them that they receive not the Grace of God in vain for behold now is the accepted time behold now is the day of Salvation And Christ saith weeping over Jerusalem If thou hadst known at least in this thy day the things that belong to thy Peace but now they are hid from thine eyes c. Because thou knewest not the time of thy Visitation Luk. 19. 41 42 43 44. An hundred places more might be produced to prove that men on Earth are not left as desperate deplorate or remediles as those in Hell which yet they must be if they had no Redeemer or no Sacrifice for their sin Arg. 26. A processu Judiciali causa condemnationis If Christ himself shall therefore condemn men in Judgment because they received him not as their Lord-Redeemer or because they abused the fruits of his Death suffered for them then he died for All men But Christ will condemn men in Judgment because they received him not as their Lord-Redeemer or because they abused the said fruits of his Death Therefore he died for All-men That he will condemn all the Unbelievers that heard his Gospel because they did not believe in him nor receive him for their Redeemer and Saviour and Lord to Reign over them nor rest on him for Salvation is confessed by all and past dispute Luke 21. 27. Joh. 1. 10 11 12 3. 18. 1 Joh. 5. 11. 2 Thes 1. 8. 2. 10 11 12 Mar. 16. 16. Job 5. 22. Mat. 25. per totum That all men shall be judged according to their well or ill usage of the Talents of Mercy bestowed on them and repenting or not repenting in the day of Grace is plain in Mat. 25. in the Parable of the ten Virgins and of the Talents I have proved before that these Talents are Grace i. e. Miserecordiae contra meritum effectus and procured by Christs satisfaction and not given without Christs satisfaction The consequence therefore of the Major proposition is evident For shall any man dare without better proof to affirm that Christ will sit as Lord-Redeemer in Judgment and condemn most of the World to everlasting flames for refusing a Redeemer that was not their Redeemer and for not believing in him to save them by his death who never died for them and for not resting for Salvation on him that never made the least satisfaction for them and therefore was not a sufficient stay to rest on and for not believing where if they had believed Faith would do no good And where it is objected as before they should have believed that it might have been a sign to them that Christ died for them I answer besides what I answered before 1. It being first granted that Christ did not dye for them then if they had believed it would have been no sign that he died for them for it cannot be a sign of that which was not And Christs dying or not dying for them
for it cannot be a sign of that which was not 2. Never Judge did pass sentence upon a sign instead of a cause or make the want of a sign to be the cause of condemnation Then the principal cause should be non Redimi that Christ died not for us and the signal which is our not believing must be the less principal And so the Sentence should pass thus I adjudge thee to Hell Fire for not being redeemed by my blood and consequently for not having that faith which might have been a sign that I redeemed thee But who dare feign Christ Jesus to pass such a Sentence Saith Abraham far be it from thee to destroy the Righteous with the Wicked shall not the Judge of all the World do righteously Also how could Christ condemn Pagans or any for not improving his Talents of Mercy if they had none And if Christ died not for them they had none For I have proved it could not come any other way Grace as I said proper to the Gospel is Mercy contrary to Merit as Grace to the first man new created was Mercy without Merit now common or special Gospel Grace contrary to merit comes all from Christs Blood and can come no otherwise The Law came by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ of his fulness we all receive and Grace for Grace All the gifts in the Church of Tongues Miracles casting out Devils Healing Prophesying all which those may have that shall perish are yet from one and the same Spirit even the Spirit of the Son procured by his Blood In him it is that God blesseth us with all spiritual blessings common or special Now if men have none of the Talents which Christ's Death hath purchased them how can he condemn them for abusing that which they had not I know some reply that God may condemn and torment his Creature without any fault if he please and that justly because his Will is the rule of Justice To which I answer as he is Dominus Absolutus he may do with his own as he please and therefore may torment the Creature as he please at least he might have done before he undertook to dispose of them as Rector according to his Laws but as he is Ruler of the Rational Creature he will not and therefore cannot condemn or punish any but for sin seeing every punishment is essential for a fault And therefore if God should torment the undeserving Creature it would be but an Affliction or meer Suffering which is the matter of Punishment without the form but no punishment And therefore it would be neither just nor unjust being not capable of either Title But to say that God as Judge can condemn or punish a man without desert is plain Blasphemy Arg. 27. A condemnandorum inexcusabilitate If Christ died not for all then the condemned would not be left without any just excuse But the condemned shall be left without a just excuse therefore Christ died for All. The Minor is plain in Scripture All mouths shall be stopped and all the World be guilty before God Rom. 3. 19. And Christ saith They have no Cloak for their sin See Rom. 1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 c. And for the consequence of the Major there is enough said to prove it before And further let me add for explication a few words Excuse is contrary to Accusation As there are therefore divers sorts of Accusation so is there of Excusation Men may be Accused at the Bar of God 1. Upon the grounds afforded in the Law of Works 2. Or according to the Mediators new Law or the Law of Grace According to the Law of Works men may be accused 1. Of violating the Precept 2. Of being liable to the penalty For the first of these no man on Earth hath any just excuse for all have sinned and must confess it and he that saith he hath no sin is a lyer 2. If any man be accused of being liable to penalty according to the tenour of the Law of Works this also must be confessed and hath no excuse no not for them that Christ died for in the strictest sense or that are Justified 2. And for Accusation in the reference to the Law of Grace either men will be accused 1. Of not performing the duties of that Law as commanded 2. Or of not performing the condition of it as it is a condition 3. Or of being liable to the penalty 1. Privative 2. Positive 1. For the first all men must confess that they are guilty For though in the Law of Nature the Duty commanded and the condition were the same yet in the Law of Grace the Duty commanded is of larger extent than the condition For perfect obedience is commanded though only faith and sincere obedience be the condition Only the Duty commanded is the matter about which sincere obedience which is part of the condition is exercised Now here no man can excuse himself by saying that he hath done all that Christ commanded him But the non-redeemed may excuse themselves for not doing it For against every part of the Precepts proper to the Gospel they have excuse as will appear anon when we speak of the conditions 2. The condition of the new Law or Covenant is Faith working by Love Repentance Thankfulness and sincere Obedience He that performeth not these must perish Now if an unredeemed person shall be accused for not performing these though he must confess the non-performance yet he hath these reasons to give for his excuse 1. Where there is no gift there can be no condition in proper sense of obtaining But Christs blood was not given to us and consequently not the proper fruits of it Therefore 2. How could we believe in or receive Christ as our Redeemer who never Redeemed us Or trust to his Blood for Justification which was never shed for us And therefore would not have been sufficient to save us had it been possible for us to have believed in it or had we actually believed Moreover believing to Justification is but the accepting or receiving Christ as an offered Saviour and Head or as conditionally given us viz. if we will receive him this is commonly confest now how can there be a receiving or accepting without a giving Is there any contradiction more palpable We therefore to whom Christ was not given could not receive him and if he were not given for us he could not be given to us seeing the latter doth presuppose the former 3. Repentance to Life presupposeth some hope of Life given I mean spem possibilitatis probabilitatis si non spem certitudinis But there is no hope given to any but in and by the blood of Jesus Christ shed for them for there is no other name by which they can be saved without this hope we might have an Infernal despairing tormenting Repentance but could not possibly have a Repentance unto Life or such as could be to us any means
Law is a proper penalty of the second because the New Law doth restore to all Men their lost right to Life on an easy condition and therefore as the Privation of Life is first given or promised in the first Law was the penalty of that Law so the Privation of the same Life as redeemed and restored by the Mediator is the penalty of the new Law So that it is a recovered happiness that they this way lose and so are twice dead as Jude speaks 5. The very Non-Liberation of the new Law in denial of Remission and Salvation is a great and proper penalty As the Non-continuation of Adams happiness in paradise was a penalty of that Law and the not-giving of a greater if that Law did promise a greater If a Prince make an Act of pardon and oblivion for a company of imprisoned condemned Malefactors in these terms that if they will repent and thankfully accept his favour they shall all be pardoned and also dignified to be Princes and his Favourites If they will not none of them shall be pardoned but all shall die by a more cruel Death Here this Law of Grace hath as its peculiar penalty 1. Their Non-liberation and so their first deserved Death not as first deserved but as confirmed and peremptorily adjudged to them for their ingratitude and so 2. The loss of Life as it was conditionally restored and was in Law as it were a new Life 3. And the loss of the promised offered dignities 4. And the sorer kind of death so is it in the case in Hand For the confirmation of the Minor I need not to say much more seeing for ought I know it is generally granted I never met yet with any that durst say that all the Non-Elect do undergo none of the fore described penalties of the new Law but only the meer penalties of the first Law Doubtless God is offended specially at their unbelief and will destroy them as Christs Enemies because they would not that he should Reign over them Luke 21. 27. and Christ will come in flaming fire rendring vengeance to them for not knowing God and not obeying the Gospel of our Lord Jesus 2. Thes 1. 7. 8. 9. and he will damn them all that obeyed not the Truth of the Gospel but had pleasure in unrighteousness 1 Thes 2. 10. 11. 12. And this is the condemnation that Light is come into the World and Men love darkness rather then light because their deeds were evil And because when Christ came to his own his own received him not Joh. 1. 10. 21 11. For it shall come to pass that every Soul that heareth not the voice of this Prophet shall be destroyed Acts 3. 23. And they that believe not Jesus is the Christ shall dye in their sins And except men repent they shall all perish Luk. 13. 3 5. yea whoever believeth not shall be damned Mar. 16. 16. For he is the Author of Eternal Salvation to them only that obey him Heb. 5. 9. So that as men suffer for sin against the new so also from the obligation of that Law binding them over to Judgment and therefore they are judged by that Law Mat. 25. yea I doubt not but all the World shall be judged by the Redeemer for misimploying his Talents of Grace those that perish and not only for not perfect fulfilling the Law of Works none is condemned meerly for that And if it be so then the same Law of Christ must needs constitute the penalty to be executed Nor did I ever meet with any that durst say that it was no punishment to Unbelievers to be denied Pardon and Justification and Salvation from their deserved damnation which were all offered to them in the Gospel and which Believers do receive much less should any say that the additional torments of such and the loss of the greater promised glory are no punishments Yea even in this life the non-elect receive of the punishments proper to the new Law viz. non remission and non reconciliation and the forsaking of God when he casts them off and gives them up to themselves because they would none of him Psal 81. 11 12. and leaves them desolate because when Christ would have gathered them to him in tender mercy they would not Mat. 23. 37 38. and gives them over to believe lyes because they received not the love of the Truth that they might be saved 2 Thes 2. 10 11. and takes his holy Spirit from them because they grieved and quenched it And all this will be out of doubt if we consider the definition of Punishment which is a natural evil inflicted because of a Moral or the hurt of our persons inflicted for sin Now there is no doubt but all these forementioned are evils to us or hurtful to mens persons and no doubt but they are inflicted for sin and then as to the species They are inflicted for sins against the Law of Christ by force of the obligation of the commination of that Law and the sentence past by Christ as Redeemer and Author of that Law Yea what if I said that strictly and directly men suffer not at all the penalty of the Law of Works For all are delivered from that penalty on condition they Repent and Believe and so the obligation of that Law is suspended to all though not strictly abrogated and transferred and as it were sequestred into the hands of Christ to be disposed of by him inflicting or not inflicting it as men deal with him according to his terms of Grace so that now the penalty is immediately and strictly the penalty of the Law of Christ as it doth both non-liberare and peremptorily bind men over to it and it is properly the loss of a Life recovered by Christs blood which is the punishment though remotely it be also from the obligation of the first Law which being but suspended by Christ and conditionally dissolved remaineth in force upon the non-performance of the condition as soon as the time of performance is expired So that it is undeniable that the damned suffer the privation of the fruits of Christs death and satisfaction yea and of his satisfaction for them in perticular For as it is certain that there is no remission without blood and no Justification or Salvation without Christs satisfaction so it is as much beyond doubt with all sober men that Christs satisfaction for one man will not procure Pardon and Salvation for another So that the Minor is fully clear And for the Major proposition it is as clear For there can be no effects without a cause As no man can receive the effects of Christs Death but those for whom he died so no man can lose or be deprived of those effects but those for whom he died for the cause is presupposed A Negation is no Punishment It is not a punishment to a Stone that it is not a Man that it is mute liveless c. nor to a Beast not to be saved nor
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 Redâ—mpti fuerant diabolo se rursus mancipantes incomparaliâ—e illud pretium quantum in se irritum faciunt And that you may see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Codices habent Christum qui solus est Deus ac Herus certe Others say it is an uncertainty in secundâ Petri Epistolâ solius Christi fit mentio ille herus vocatur You see Calvin speaks both for the sense of these Texts and the point of Universal Redemption as much and as plain as I. The second shall be the Divines of the Assembly in their last Edition of their Annotations Thus they say The Lord that bought them that gave a price sufficient for them even his own precious blood Acts 20. 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20. 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. This is their first exposition and as a second they add that from their profession And they refer us farther to Jude 4. where they say thus Denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ denying Christ to be God who was their Master by profession for they professed themselves to be of his Household and their Lord by publick Authority over them or by their deeds denying Christ so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Father and God the Son But indeed the whole Sentence is to be understood of Christ who is called God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Master and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord So that Lord here in the first place should be translated Master For Christ is God in respect of his Godhead with his Father He is our Master because he hath bought us 2 Pet. 2. 1. He is our Lord because by him all things are preserved 1 Cor. 8. 6. Heb. 1. 3. So that he is God as our Creator Lord as our Preserver Master as our Redeemer 6. Mr. Dav. Dickson on 2 Pet. 2. 1. expoundeth it of Christ as professed by them to be their Redeemer 7. Erasmus's Paraphrase is plainly they shall deny Christ by whose blood they were Redeemed and whom they professed Many more are here omitted 8. Even Piscator himself confesseth it spoken of Jesus Christ and saith thus Per quas illi abnegaturi sint Dominum id est Christum qui ipsos mercatus est Periphrasis Christi argumentosa quasi dicat Christus illos est Mercatus ergo non debebant eum negare Mercatus est viz pretioso suo sanguine Conser Acts 20 28. 1 Cor. 6. 20. Then comes he in with his last shift not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I 'll not now stand to transcribe any more these being of such Authority and so impartial and the last the most extream in these Controversies of almost any Learned Judicious Pious Divine 3. I come next to the Third and last Reason which is given to shew that Christ bought not these men The foresaid Author saith Neither is it more certain that the Apostle speaketh of the purchase of the Wolves and Hypocrites in respect of the reality of the purchase and not rather in respect of that estimation which others had of them and by reason of their outward seeming profession ought to have had and of the profession that themselves made to be purchased by him c. This is the great answer which is the last refuge It was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am ashamed unfeignedly to remember the time when I took up with this interpretation my self and had the face to maintain it Consid 1. It was no act of theirs which the Apostle mentions which profession though dissembled might have warranted him to ascribe to them as he may call those Holy that seem to be Holy by profession but it is an Act of Christ and his passion long ago performed He bought them 2. It is not an act ascribed to them during the time of that profession while that profession might have better warranted a mistaking charitable judgment but it is after by Apostacy they cast away that profession and so if before we might have indulged a charitable mistaken judgment yet after we may not 3. It is the words of the Holy Ghost who is the Spirit of truth and sent to lead the Apostles into all truth And shall we feign the Spirit of Truth to assert a falsehood meerly because men profess that falsehood and this after they reject that profession Wicked men say Christ bought them and afterward renounce or deny Christ 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 without any need or fair reason 4. May not a Man by this dealing say what he will as the meaning of Scripture May not almost any truth of God expresly affirmed in Scripture be said to be spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God saith as Man would have him and in giving his Laws to be a rule to the World he speaks untruly because men speak so before him making their speeches the rule of his speech which is a rule to them Blame us not too zealously if we do not swallow these things so easily even meerly because Mr. such a one or such a one saith so But let us see why they say so for sure they have some shew of reason why 1. They say It is the perpetual course of Scripture to ascribe all those things to every one that is in the fellowship of the Church which are proper to them only
non invenient ullam Marlorat adds talibus ergo contemptoribus nulla sâ—es veniae relinquitur So that they had a Sacrifice for sin till they Apostatised So Dickson also in loc Piscator and many more for I will name none but who are known to be against universal Redemption lest their exposition be rejected To all this I find no more objections of our opponents but to the first argument which we draw hence they return many words Which was both from all those benefits which here Apostates are said to partake of which only Christs Blood hath procured them and specially in that they are expresly ascribed to Christs Blood for they are said to have been sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant Now to this they say to give you the Sense briefly For if I should recite and answer the maze of words which some here use I should provoke the Reader to throw away all in weariness or loathing 1. This speaks only of some that were professors of the Faith of the Gospel separated from the World brought into the Church c. but these are not all Men. Answ Grant that it is some Non-Elect and it is as much as I desire from this Text. And if that be granted I think there is few would question but that it is for all the Non-Elect in the Church that Christ died And for those that never heard of him though I am past doubt that Christ satisfied for the sins 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 declare what hath been nor assert what may be but only adds a commination upon a supposition of a thing c. Ans This I answered before I 'll stand to the Judgment of almost any learned Expositor on this Text though against Universal Redemption See Calvin Beza Paraeus Piscator Perkins Dickson Bullinger c. 3. They say It is certain that these Men made profession of all these things c. and therefore the open renouncing them was a sin so hainous as deserved all this Commination though the Apostates themselves had never interest in Christs Blood Answ What 's this to the point The Text saith they were sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant and not only they professed that they were 4. They say it was the manner of the Saints and Apostles themselves to esteem of all baptised initiated persons ingrafted into the Church as sanctified persons So that speaking of Backsliders he could not make mention of them any otherwise than as they were commonly esteemed to be and at that time in the Judgment of charity were to be considered c. 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 themselves not to be so The Apostles will not encourage known falshood in the Speeches or Opinions of others much less be the Authors of it and lead them into it doth the Apostle here pronounce their Case hopeless and remediless and tell them there is no Sacrifice for their sin but a fearful looking for of Judgment c and doth he at the same time perswade People to believe that they were sanctified by the Blood of the Covenant c. if it were not true Even then when it openly discovereth it self false or is supposed so to do 5. They say if the Text be interpreted positively and according to the truth of the thing it self in both parts thereof viz. 1. That these of whom the Apostle speaketh were truly sanctified 2. That such may totally perish then these two things will follow 1. That faith and Sanctification is not the Fruit of Election 2. That Believers may fall finally from Christ Answ 1. These were truly sanctified though not with that Sanctification which is proper to the Elect and saved 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 Universal cause then Election is 6. They further say there is nothing in the Text to perswade that the Persons here spoken of must needs be truly justified and regenerated Believers much less that Christ died for them c. Answ 1. That they were illuminated and partakers of the Holy Ghost and sanctified by Christs Blood the Text speaks without strained consequence with Heb. 6. 6. But that they had true special saving Faith Regeneration or Sanctification I affirm not Yet was it true 2. Is it a strained consequence to conclude 1. That he who by Apostacy is fallen into that misery which he was never in before and other sinners are not in that now there is no more Sacrifice for his sin had before a Sacrifice And so have other sinners that be not fallen so far as he is 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 contrary-minded which the Books at hand afford but I shall do far less than I thought to do in it as finding that they are so disordered wordy and weak in many that I shall but fill Paper with needless Lines and be tedious and ungrateful to the judicious Readers The 8th Text which I will insist on is Matth. 22. 2 3 4 12 13. The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a certain King which made a Marriage for his Son and sent forth his Servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding and they would not come And he sent forth other Servants saying Tell them that were bidden saying Behold I have prepared my Dinner My Oxen and my Fatlings are killed and all things are ready Come unto the Marriage c. Then said he to his Servants the Wedding is ready but they which were bidden were not worthy So 12. 13. Here it is agreed on that God is the King The Wedding feast is Christ and the benefits of his
And 1. I argue thus If it be no injustice in God to oblige men to punishment for all Christs satisfaction then it is no injustice actually to punish men for all Christs satisfaction But the former is true therefore so is the latter First I will prove the consequence of the Major Proposition thus from the essential offices of the Law 1. The Law is Juris constitutiva vel saltem declarativa It constituteth Right or at least declareth right I put in the latter declareth not as my own sense but to prevent the quarrel of any that may think this or any Right was constituted from Eternity before there was any Law or at least before that which we say obligeth sinners to punishment Though indeed the Law doth constitute before it declare And so the Law is Regula jussitiâ— vel saltem regula justa And if so then to execute such a Law can be no injustice 2. The Law is Norma judicii that 's past question I speak of a Law in force and as to the subjects to whom it is in force And if so then it can be no injustice to execute it But I think few sober men will deny the Major and therefore I leave that And one would think none should doubt of the Minor Whether it be any injustice in God by his Law to oblige to punishment those that Christ Died for But because the Antinomians deny it let us prove it If God do de facto oblige to punishment those for whom Christ Died then it is no injustice so to do But God doth so actually Ergo c. I hope if we prove that God doth it none dare say it is unjust If he be not Just he is not God And that God doth it I prove thus 1. Those that God Hateth and are Children of Wrath and without Hope and without God in the World and Strangers to the Covenant of Promises and Aliens to the Common-Wealth of Israel c. are certainly obliged to punishment But such many have been and still are for whom Christ Died Ergo c. God hateth all the workers of Iniquity and they are all by Nature Children of Wrath c. But many that Christ Died for are before Regeneration workers of Iniquity Ergo c. 2. All that are under the Curse of the Law are obliged to punishment But many that Christ Died for were under the Curse of the Law since his Death undertaken when his satisfaction was in force yea since his actual suffering Ergo. c. Many Scriptures shew both that we were under the Curse of the Law when Christ actually suffered and that all the Elect are under it still as well as others till their conversion I am loth to trouble the Reader in heaping up Testimonies 3. All that are condemned already and the Wrath of God abideth on them are doubtless obliged to punishment But such are many for whom Christ Died even all the Elect as well as others while they are unbelievers John 3. 18. 4. All that are guilty are obliged to punishment Proved Reatus est obligatio ad poenam they are all one thing But some that Christ Died for are Guilty Ergo c. Even all before pardon and that is all before Conversion are guilty 5. All those whose sins Christ doth pardon were first guilty or obliged to punishment But some that Christ Died for have their sins pardoned Ergo c. The Major is proved beyond all doubt from the formal Nature of Pardon which is the Remitting of Guilt or the Dissolving of an Obligation to punishment therefore where is no such obligation there can be no Dissolution of it For that which is not cannot be dissolved And so there is no capacity for pardon no more than a living man can be raised from the Dead or a Man cured of a Disease which he never had The like may be said of Justification also Our Divines have fully proved against the Antinomians that we are unpardoned and unjustified till we believe We are Justified by Faith and therefore were unjustified before Faith 6. If none be obliged to punishment for whom Christ Died then none such may pray for Pardon nor confess that they need any Pardon from Christ For Pardon being the dissolving of an obligation to punishment there can be no pardon where there is no obligation and therefore no need of it nor of prayer for it But the consequent is very wicked We must daily pray Forgive us our Debts and Trespasses Ergo c. The Second Argument is this If God do actually punish those for whom Christ Died then he may justly punish them But God doth actually punish such Ergo c. The Major is unquestionable The Minor is fully proved thus 1. The express words of Scripture shew it Lev. 26. 41 43. Lam. 3 39. and 4. 6 22. Amos 1. 3 6 9 11 13. and 2. 1 4 6. 2 Cor. 2. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 14. Jer. 44. 13. Ezra 9. 13. Hos 4. 9 15. Jer. 9 25. Read the places 2. The execution of that sentence Gen. 3. 16 17 18 19. is certainly punishment I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy Conception in sorrow thou shalt bring forth Children c. Cursed is the ground for thy sake in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy Life c. Dust thou art and to Dust shalt thou return But this sentence is executed on those that Christ Died for Ergo c. 3. Those whom God chastiseth he punisheth But he chastiseth those whom Christ Died for Ergo c. The Major is undeniable to all that know what chastisement and punishment is Punishment is the Genus being a Natural Evil or the privation of a Natural Good inflicted for a Moral Evil the privation of a Moral Good Rigorous vindictive Punishment tending most to the ruine of the Sinner is one species of it Chastisement is another species which by the hurt of a sinner tendeth to his good And though this be called Paternal yet 1. Chastisement is not the proper act of Parents Masters may Chastise Servants and Princes their Subjects 2. It is Metaphorically called Paternal in one respect as God exerciseth it when yet in other respects it is the act of God as Rector per Legâ—s for so all Gods Chastisements are according to his Laws Object All shall work together for good to them that Love God to the Called c. therefore nothing is Punishment Answ 1. The best Interpreters according to the plain truth expound that Text of Affliction only and most of such Affliction as is suffered for Christs cause or at least not for hainous sinning against God And it is unlikely it should be otherwise 1. Because the defect of Love to God seems excepted in limiting it to them that love God But one that Christ Died for may be defective in love to God therefore that is not promised to work for good 2. Every Man dieth in some sin and how that