is asserted as done 4 In the last vers Heb. 10.39 the Apostle speaking of believers as he doth also in Heb. 10.26 29. saith we are not they which withdraw our selves Whereby he plainly signifieth that the believers of whom he wrote in Heb. 10.29 had not or did not withdraw themselves or make apostasie wherefore the apostacy in treading Christs bloud under foot mentioned Heb. 10.29 is not asserted or affirmed as a thing indeed done by believers but as a supposition as if in case a believer should do such a thing then he should perish or be sorely punished So much for answer to this Text Heb. 10.29 2. PET. 2.1 There shall be false teachers among you c. denying the Lord that bought them and bring on themselves swift damnation Here say they S. Peter affirms that some men bought by the bloud of Christ shall be false teachers bring in damnable Heresies deny the Lord Christ and shall bring on themselves damnation whence they argue as before that Christ bought or died for those that perish and are damned and consequently for all men for we say Christ died for those that perish not but are saved and they prove by this Text that Christ died for those that do perish and are damned so if Christ died for those that perish and for those that perish not then he died for all men of this see their Acta Synodalia de morte Christi pag. 346. Answer 1 It cannot be proved by this Text that Christ bought those that did perish and are damned for the Text doth not expresly say or intimate that these false teachers did ever after live and die in impenitency for be it so that they taught false Doctrine brought in damnable Heresies and denied the Lord Christ Jesus yet they might repent of all these sins before they died and so be eternally saved Paul when he was a Saul was a blasphemer a persecutor and an oppressor and yet he was upon his rePentance received to mercy 1. Tim. 1.13 16. and he thought he was bound to do many contrary things against the name of Jesus Christ Act. 26.9 10 11. whereby he denied the Lord that bought him and yet he was not damned But perhaps they will urge the last words of the Text that they shall bring on themselves swift damnation To which I answer that from these words it cannot be proved that they were damned for these words must be understood with an exception unless they repent as Mat. 3.10 every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire that is unless they repent Revel 21.8 But the fearfull and the unbelieving c. shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone that is if they repent not but go on still in their sins till death so they shall bring on themselves swift damnation unless they repent and this is my first answer 2 Whereas Arminians understand by the word Lord in the Text the Lord Christ Jesus and by the word bought in the Text the redemption from sin and eternal wrath by the bloud of Christ I deny both these senses of the words and shall shew that they may be well and safely taken in other senses which will nothing further their cause First for the word Lord it may be understood of God the Father or of God in general for the clearing up of this note that in the new Testament the word whereby Christ is noted usually is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Lord but in this Text of Peter we have an other word which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and translated Lord and being an other word and not usual to note Christ it is likely enough to be of an other sense we find this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Lord and usually applied to God the Father or to God in general or to earthly and fleshly Lords and Masters not unto Christ as Mediator as in these Texts Luke 2.29 Act. 4.24 2. Tim. 2.21 Jude 4. 1. Tim. 6.1 2. Tit. 2.9 1. Pet. 2.18 wherefore since this word is usually speaking of God understood of God the Father why may it not be so understood also in this their Text 2. Pet. 2.1 and since it is seldom or rather never understood of Christ as Redeemer why should it be so understood in this Text 2. Pet. 2.1 Secondly for the word bought this may be understood of Gods buying and redeeming his people from their bondage in Egypt or from some other slavery servitude and bondage to their enemies of which you may read in Deut. 9.26 2. Sam. 7.23 Psal 10.7.2 3. Jer. 15.21 Mich. 4.10 Jer. 31.10 11. And then the words of S. Peter may be understood as an agravation of the sin of those false teachers for that they should bring into the Church such damnable Heresies as whereby they should deny even the Lord their God who bought and redeemed them from servitude and slavery unto their oppressing enemies in the flesh And the rather this sense may stand because it so well suites with the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord the which is taken for God the Father but seldom or rather never for Christ the Redeemer and this is my second answer 3 As touching the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated bought them it may be rendered taught them it may be translated taught see Crispine and Scapula who say that the Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath besides an other signification this for one it signifieth an oration or sermon the Verbs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie to preach or teach yea the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not onely to buy but also to consult and to give counsel wherefore the Text may be thus translated Denying the Lord that taught them or gave them counsel Now this makes nothing for proof that the Lord bought them or redeemed them and this is my third Answer 4 If for all this they will press the Text and understand it of the Lord Christ and that he hath bought and redeemed wicked persons and unbelievers 2. Pet. 2.1 they may as well say also that God justified the world of wicked men and unbelievers 2. Cor. 5.19 and that God justifieth the ungodly as ungodly Rom. 4.5 which is contrary to Prov. 17.15 and so much for answer to this their Text 2. Pet. 2.1 ROM 5.6 For when we were yet without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly Lo here say they is it not said expresly that Christ died for the ungodly If therefore Christ died as well for the ungodly as for the godly then Christ died for all men for good and bad Answer There is another Text of like kind 1. Pet. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered the Just for the unjust c. Wherefore one Answer shall serve to both True it is that Christ died for the ungodly and for the unjust and had he not died for such
A CONFUTATION of the DUTCH-ARMINIAN TENENT of Universal Redemption With Relation in special unto certain Sectaries in ENGLAND By name the Morians or Revelators with others tracing them who hold That Christ died for all men good and bad By THEOPH BRABOURN Matth. 7.6 Give ye not that which is holy to dogs neither cast ye your pearls before swine LONDON Printed by WILL. BENTLEY Anno Domini 1651. To the READER THis ensuing Discource Christian Reader lying by me and fitted for the Press but with thoughts never to have it Printed so long as I live my mind is now altered very lately upon this occation Finding by sad experience that this Dutch-ARMINIAN Tenent of Universal Redemption hath of late invaded our English Nation and infected the minds and perverted the judgement of many who pretend highest for God and godliness I could not but alter my thoughts and resolve to publish this Discource if it may be to prevent the further growth and spreading of it There is a Sect of Revelators or Manifestators called Morians of one MORE dwelling near Wisbech who with his Disciples about eight or nine years since were orthodox in this point with us but since finding this new light of Universal Redemption to be a notable means to further an other and more ancient new light which formerly he had received and taught namely his doctrine of Free-grace as he calls it presently he set abroach this Universal Redemption among his Disciples of and from whom as I suppose our Independents of later time have borrowed this light for of late some of them are not ashamed to teach and preach it publickly offering Christ and the benefits of his death to dogs and swine to the worst of men saying Come Whoremaster come Drunkard the work is wrought for you believe it c. and they may as well say Come Rascal come Rogue come Tag and Rag believe it Christ died for you all Thus they fear not to give Christ that Pearl and Holy thing unto dogs and swine Their new Arminian light hath taught them to give the Childrens bread to dogs Not long since some of the Bishops were tainted with this Error and how odious were they for it in the eyes of these very men but now themselves are infected with the same Error and it is become a lovely Truth and what have these men to say for this Error more than the Bishops had surely if so much yet nothing more unless it be this that it is a bright beam of new light arisen to them of late and notably tending to their new doctrine of Free grace as they call it and that the spirit hath taught it them but remember that there is a Spirit of Truth and a spirit of Error 1. John 4.6 and so I end THEO BRABOURN A CONFUTATION of the ARMINIAN Tenent of Universal Redemption IN handling this Controversie I shall first propound sundrie Arguments against it Secondly I shall make answer unto the Texts alleadged by Arminians for proof of their Tenent Thirdly I shall confute a common Answer of theirs given to a notable Objection of ours And Fourthly I shall confute their distinction of Impetration and Application I begin with the first of these and these are my Arguments against it ARGUM. I. If Christ forbade his ministers to give or deliver his Word and Sacrament concerning his death unto all men as unto unbelieving impenitent scandalous and wicked men Then Christ did not give or deliver himself to death for all men or then Christ died not for all men The reason hereof is this If Christ had given himself to death for all men good and bad then would he have his ministers to do so too in delivering the Word and Sacrament and it is against reason to think that Christ should give himself for all men and forbid his ministers to give him to all men or to some men so there is the same reason of both Now if he forbade his ministers to deliver his Word and Sacrament unto all men unto wicked and impenitent men then surely he did not deliver himself to death for all men For 1. It is absurd to think that a ministers Commission in delivering the Word and Sacrament concerning Christs death should be of less extent than Christ his death is of as that his Cōmission should extend but to some men onely when Christ his death extends to all men wherefore if his Commission be but unto some men onely then Christ his death is not to or for all men but to and for some men onely 2. The Word and Sacrament concerning Christ his death are signs representing Christs death unto us now the sign and the thing signified by it must be of equal extent as if the sign belong but unto some men onely then Christ his death the thing signified by it belongs not unto all men but unto some men onely 3. If Christ would not permit his ministers to give the bread and wine in the Sacrament which is the lesser unto all men then much less would he give himself which is the greater unto all men If he forbade his ministers to give his bread and wine unto all men muchless would he give his life his own bodie and bloud for all men if he denied the Sign unto wicked and impenitent persons then much more would he denie there the thing signified which is his pretious bodie and bloud so much for my proposition But Christ forbade his ministers to give or deliver his Word and Sacrament concerning his death unto all men as unto unbelieving impenitent scandalous and wicked men This my assumption I thus prove first concerning the Sacrament 1. It is the doctrine both of our own and other reformed Churches that Christ would not have the Sacrament of the Lords supper given by the minister unto unbelievers impenitent scandalous and wicked men 2. Philip would not give the Sacrament of Baptism unto the Eunuch but upon the condition of his faith first Acts 8.37 S. Paul would not have the Lords supper given unto the incestuous person 1. Corinth 5.1 5 13. nor unto impenitent wicked men as not unto fornicatours idolaters drunkards railers nor extortioners 1. Cor. 5.11 and see Matth. 18.17 So much for the Sacrament next for the Word 2. Concerning the Word Christ would not have the word concerning his death given or delivered by his ministers unto unbelievers impenitent scandalous and wicked men which I thus prove In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the Minister delivers the bread with these words of Christ This is my bodie which is broken for thee the which words are according to Christs institution 1. Cor. 11.24 Luke 22.19 now forasmuch as Christ would not have impenitent wicked persons admitted to the Lords Supper he would not have his ministers deliver unto them this his word concerning his death This is my bodie which is broken for thee so Christs minister may not say to a wicked man Christ died for thee Yet if
Arminians doctrine be true that Christ died for all men then a minister may say to the vilest impenitent person were he a Judas or worse Christ died for thee And by the way I wonder that Independents can hold forth Christ to all men in a Sermon saying Come whore-master drunkard c. Christ died for thee and yet refuse to give the Lords supper to scandalous persons saying to them Christ died for thee 2. Our Saviour would not have holy things given to dogs nor pearls to swine Matth. 7.6 now wicked and impenitent persons appearing incorrigible are dogs and swine Christ whether given in the word or in the sacrament is an holy thing and a pearl wherefore a minister may not give Christ to an incorrigible wicked man saying Christ died for thee 3. S. Paul preached the word concerning Christs death at Antioch Acts 13.14 16 27 38. where being a mixt multitude of sheep and goats of wheat and tares he directs his speech unto the sheep and wheat not unto the goats and tares for he spake as he said To those that fear God Acts 13.16 26. and so soon as some of his Auditours appeared to be goats and tares and such as feared not God he turned away from them and carried away the Gospel unto the Gentiles refusing to preach the word of Christ unto them Acts 13.45 46. and see Acts 19.9 whereby you see S. Paul a minister of Christ would not deliver the word concerning Christs death unto wicked men and such as feared not God It may be objected that S. Paul saith It was necessarie that this word should first be preached unto them that is unto those goats and tares the obstinate Jews Acts 13.46 and so Paul preached of Christs death as well to wicked men as to the godly Hereunto I answer 1. As the Husband-man bestoweth the same pains upon the tares as upon the wheat before the tares appear to him to be tares so the Apostle might preach Christ to the wicked as well as to the godly they being together in a mixt assembly before the wicked appeared to him to be wicked but yet as the husband-man takes pains for the wheats sake and not for the tares sake so Paul might preach Christ for the godly's sake and not for the wicked's sake and it is evident in the Text to be so for Paul directs his speech unto the godly in the Assembly to those that feared God Acts 13.16.26 excluding the wicked for when in an Assembly there are both godly and wicked if the minister directs his speech to the godly he excludes the wicked or if he directs an use to the wicked he excludes the godly 2. So soon as these tares the obstinate Jews appeared to Paul to be tares as you see he refused to preach Christ unto them Acts 13.45 46. and for the same cause had he known them at the first to be tares and if he could have separated them from the assembly of the godly he would not have preached Christ unto them at the first True it is Paul saith It was necessarie that the Word should be preached vnto them for it could not be avoided being they were mixed with the godly and did not at first appear to be tares it was therefore necessarie for Paul to preach unto them with the godly at the first though he intended not his doctrine to be for them Thus I have proved my Assumption and so the conclusion follows thus Therefore Christ did not give or deliver himself to death for all men or Christ died not for all men So much for my first Argument ARGUM. II. If Christ would not pray for all men then Christ would not die for all men The reason thereof is this If Christ would not do the lesser for all men then he would not do the greater for all men If Christ would not offer to God the calves of his lips for all men then he would not offer to God the sacrifice of his pretious bodie and bloud for all men If Christ would not bestow so much love upon all men as to pray for them then would he not bestow so much love upon all men as to die and to shed his heart bloud for them In a word If Christ would exclude some men from his prayers surely he meant to exclude them from his bitter death and passion So much for my proposition But Christ would not pray for all men For proof hereof see John 17.8 9. where believers are distinguished from the world that is from the world of unbelievers and for these men who then did believe Christ prayed saying I pray for them vers 9. and Christ prayed also for those men who should afterwards to the worlds end believe in him vers 20. but for the world that is for the world of unbelievers Christ would not vouchsafe so much as to pray to God for them saying I pray not for the world vers 9. So much for proof of my Assumption and so my Conclusion follows Therefore Christ would not die for all men And by consequence Christ did not die for all men for look what Christ would not do that he did not do unless we should imagine that Christ his will and his actions were contrary one to the other or that he did do that which he did not first will to do Arminians in their Acta Synodalia de Morte Christi pag. 319. do answer to my Assumption and to my Text brought to prove it thus Christ saith not that he would not pray for the world that is that he would never afterwards pray for them but thus he saith that he doth not pray for the world that is that he doth not for that present time pray for them or that he doth not in this particular prayer John 17.9 pray for them Hereunto I thus reply 1. Though I shall prove by and by that there is more in Christs words than Arminians do grant yet this which they do grant is sufficient to make good my argument for this is in the Text and they grant it that Christ said He did not pray for the world that is at that time and in that particular prayer he did not pray for them from which it doth undeniably follow that as he did not then pray for them so he would not then pray for them or it was his will at that time and in that prayer not to pray for them but to exclude them from his prayer and from the benefit thereof This I thus make good A wise mans actions and words do flow from his understanding and his will and his words and deeds are regulated and governed by his will so as what he doth or speaketh the same he first willed and what he refuseth to do or to speak the same he willeth or willeth not to do or speak I say being a mans actions and words are regulated by his will both in his speech and in his silence refusing to speak whensoever he is
say Christ intended to die for the salvation of all men and yet denie them the knowledge of it by the Gospel preached So much for my Major But Christ neither would nor hath caused the Gospel to be preached to all men whereby they should be brought to faith and be the better for his death This I thus prove 1. The Gospel is not in these days preached to many Indians and barbarous nations 2. In old time before us the Gospel or any thing of Christ was not preached to millions of Gentiles Psal 147.19 20. Acts 10.12 28. and 16.6 7. Ephes 2.11 12 13 14. 3. Christ preached to some men in parables and darkly to this end that they should not obtain remission of sins and be the better for his death Mark 4.11 12. So much for my Minor and the conclusion follows Therefore Christ did not so love all men as to give himself and to die for all men Before I have done with this Argument I must answer an Objection which my Reader may make and confute an Answer which the Arminians do make the Objection is this you said in your first Argument that Christ would not have the word concerning his death which is Gospel to be preached to wicked impenitent and unbelieving men and here in this third Argument you say that the Gospel ought to be preached to all men and among all men are many wicked men c. Hereunto I answer that this is no contradiction for in my first Argument I spake absolutely and as the truth is but here in my third Argument I speak not absolutely but conditionally with an if as If Christ died for all men then the Gospel must be preached to all men be they godly or wicked so this I speak but upon a supposition of the truth of the Arminian tenent which if it be true then this follows that Gospel must be preached to all men good and bad So much of this Objection and now I come to the answer of Arminians which is this The Arminians in their Acta Synodalia de Morte Christi pag. 327 328. do answer this my third Argument thus that a limitation is to be added to my Major and then my Minor will be false thus therefore they frame it a new and limit it If Christ so loved all men as to die for all men then would he have caused the Gospel to be actually preached to all men or else be prepared and in a readinesse to have it preached so soon as men be fitted to receive it The better to colour this limitation they make a twofold calling a common or general calling and a special calling by the general calling they understand the law and light of nature as the natural knowledge that there is a God and of the law of God to which men ow obedience now to him that useth this aright God is prepared to communicate unto him his special calling which is the preaching of the Gospel so the well using of that is a fitting and preparing of men for this and the reason why many men are denied the Gospel is their own fault because they do abuse the light of nature or the general calling so then Gods will is to have the Gospel preached actually to all men that are fitted for it and is prepared to have it preached to others so soon as they be fitted for it and so be they do not put a bar in the way to hinder God by their evil deserts and unfitedness Hereunto I thus reply I will not contend about this order and method of God that first he willeth all men to make good use of the law and light of nature and then and not before to vouchsafe the Gospel to them be this true or false I will not question it but rather grant it for argument sake but yet this I denie though it be never so true in it self that this limitation shall be added to my Major That God is prepared to have the Gospel preached to men so soon as men be fitted for it and not before for this is an absurd limitation and it is to maintain one Errour by another the which I make thus appear 1 They say as it is implied in the antecedent part of my Major That Christ died for all men and then they would add to it this That some of those men are not fit to know it or not fitted to hear of it and receive it for this is implied in their limitation now is not this an absurd thing to be added as first to hold that Christ died for all men and then to add to this that some of those men are not fit to hear of it or to know it This werâ—â—â—â—erable if it were held that though men be unfit to know it at some one time of their lives yet they should be fit at some other time before death but forasmuch as men abuse the light of nature all their lives long and so die impenitently therefore they must hold that many men are never fit to hear of or know what Christ hath done for them and is it not absurd to say Christ died for many men who nor are nor ever shall be fit to know it or Christ died for many who shall never be fit to know what he hath done for them are they fitted for Christ to die for them and not fitted to know he died for them This conceit is like unto this A man pays a ransom to redeem one from captivitie or prison but the prisoner or captive is not fit to hear or know of it so long as he liveth or like unto this A Physitian makes an excellent and healthfull potion or cordial for his sick patient but adds this saying He shall know of it so soon as he is fit to know of it and to receive it when as he knows the patient shall never be fit so long as he lives is not this absurd â—â—â—refore if they will hold that Christ died for all men they must hold also that they are fit to know and hear of it which being so this is a frivolous and absurd limitation to add saying or else God and Christ be prepared to cause the Gospel to be preached to men so soon as they be fitted for it or be fit to receive it 2 Christ foresaw that many men in the world would never make a good use of the law and light of nature whereby to be fitted to know of his death If therefore this was no hinderance for Christ to die for them then this is no hinderance for the Gospel to be preached to them for there is as good reason for the one as the other yea the reason is stronger to think mens unfitness should rather hinder Christ to die for them than to hinder a sermon of Christs death to be preached to them for Christ his bloud is of more value than a ministers words and breath wherefore if Christ died for all men then are all men fit