William Bradford Institute
for Study of the
Early Settlement of America

Home
Sermons
 
Back
 
THE DEATH OF DEATH IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST




A TREATISE OF THE REDEMPTION AND RECONCILIATION THAT IS IN THE BLOOD

OF CHRIST, WITH THE MERIT THEREOF, AND SATISFACTION WROUGHT THEREBY.


John Owen

BOOK III

CHAPTER I


Arguments against the universality of redemption-The two first; from
the nature of the new covenant, and the dispensation thereof.

ARGUMENT 1. The first argument may be taken from the nature of the
covenant of grace, which was established, ratified, and confirmed in
and by the death of Christ; that was the testament whereof he was
the testator, which was ratified in his death, and whence his blood
is called "The blood of the new testament," Matt. 26:28. Neither can
any effects thereof be extended beyond the compass of this covenant.
But now this covenant was not made universally with all, but
particularly only with some, and therefore those alone were intended
in the benefits of the death of Christ.

The assumption appears from the nature of the covenant itself,
described clearly, Jer. 31:31, 32, "I will make a new covenant with
the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to
the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took
them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my
covenant they brake, though I was an husband to them, saith the
LORD;"---and Heb. 8:9-11, "Not according to the covenant that I made
with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead
them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my
covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the
covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,
saith the Lord; I will put my laws in their mind, and write them in
their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a
people: and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every
man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from
the least to the greatest," Wherein, first, the condition of the
covenant is not said to be required, but it is absolutely promised:
"I will put my fear in their hearts" And this is the main difference
between the old covenant of works and the now one of grace, that in
that the Lord did only require the fulfilling of the condition
prescribed, but in this be promiseth to effect it in them himself
with whom the covenant is made. And without this spiritual efficacy,
the truth is, the new covenant would be as weak and unprofitable,
for the end of a covenant (the bringing, of us and binding of us to
God), as the old. For in what consisted the weakness and
unprofitableness of the old covenant, for which God in his mercy
abolished it? Was it not in this, because, by reason of sin, we were
no way able to fulfil the condition thereof, "Do this, and live?"
Otherwise the connection is still true, that "he that doeth these
things shall live." And are we of ourselves any way more able to
fulfil the condition of the new covenant? Is it not as easy for a
man by his own strength to fulfil the whole law, as to repent and
savingly believe the promise of the gospel? This, then, is one main
difference of these two covenants,--that the Lord did in the old
only require the condition; now, in the new, he will also effect it
in all the federates, to whom this covenant is extended. And if the
Lord should only exact the obedience required in the covenant of us,
and not work and effect it also in us, the new covenant would be a
show to increase our misery, and not a serious imparting and
communicating of grace and mercy. If, then, this be the nature of
the new testament,--as appears from the very words of it, and might
abundantly be proved, --that the condition of the covenant should
certainly, by free grace, be wrought and accomplished in all that
are taken into covenant, then no more are in this covenant than in
whom those conditions of it are effected.

But thus, as is apparent, it is not with all; for "all men have not
faith," it is "of the elect of God:" therefore, it is not made with
all, nor is the compass thereof to be extended beyond the remnant
that are according to election. Yea, every blessing of the new
covenant being certainly common, and to be communicated to all the
covenantees, either faith is none of them, or all must have it, if
the covenant itself be general. But some may say that it is true God
promiseth to write his law in our hearts, and put his fear in our
inward parts; but it is upon condition. Give me that condition, and
I will yield the cause. Is it if they do believe? Nothing else can
be imagined. That is, if they have the law written in their hearts
(as every one that believes hath), then God promiseth to write his
law in their hearts! Is this probable, friends? is it likely? I
cannot, then, be persuaded that God hath made a covenant of grace
with all, especially those who never heard a word of covenant,
grace, or condition of it, much less received grace for the
fulfilling of the condition; without which the whole would be
altogether unprofitable and useless, The covenant is made with Adam,
and he is acquainted with it, Gen. 3:15,--renewed With Noah, and not
hidden from him,--again established with Abraham, accompanied with a
full and rich declaration of the chief promises of it, Gen. 12.;
which is most certain not to be effected towards all, as afterwards
will appear. Yea, that first distinction, between the seed of the
woman and the seed of the serpent is enough to overthrow the
pretended universality of the covenant of grace; for who dares
affirm that God entered into a covenant of grace with the seed of
the serpent?

Most apparent, then, it is that the new covenant of grace, and the
promises thereof, are all of them of distinguishing mercy,
restrained to the people whom God did foreknow; and so not extended
universally to all. Now, the blood of Jesus Christ being the blood
of this covenant, and his oblation intended only for the procurement
of the good things intended and promised thereby,--for he was the
surety thereof, Heb. 7:22, and of that only,--it cannot be conceived
to have respect unto all, or any but only those that are intended in
this covenant.

ARG. II. If the Lord intended that he should, and [he] by his death
did, procure pardon of sin and reconciliation with God for all and
every one, to be actually enjoyed upon condition that they do
believe, then ought this good-will and intention of God, with this
purchase in their behalf by Jesus Christ, to be made known to them
by the word, that they might believe; "for faith cometh by hearing,
and hearing by the word of God," Rom. 10:17: for if these things be
not made known and revealed to all and every one that is concerned
in them, namely, to whom the Lord intends, and for whom he hath
procured so great a good, then one of these things will
follow;--either, first, That they may be saved without faith in, and
the knowledge of, Christ (which they cannot have unless he be
revealed to them), which is false, and proved so; or else, secondly,
That this good-will of God, and this purchase made by Jesus Christ,
is plainly in vain, and frustrate in respect of them, yea, a plain
mocking of them, that will neither do them any good to help them out
of misery, nor serve the justice of God to leave them inexcusable,
for what blame can redound to them for not embracing and well using
a benefit which they never heard of in their lives? Doth it become
the wisdom of God to send Christ to die for men that they might be
saved, and never cause these men to hear of any such thing; and yet
to purpose and declare that unless they do hear of it and believe
it, they shall never be saved? What wise man would pay a ransom for
the delivery of those captives which he is sure shall never come to
the knowledge of any such payment made, and so never be the better
for it? Is it answerable to the goodness of God, to deal thus with
his poor creatures? to hold out towards them all in pretence the
most intense love imaginable, beyond all compare and
illustration,--as his love in sending his Son is set forth to
be,--and yet never let them know of any such thing, but in the end
to damn them for not believing it? Is it answerable to the love and
kindness of Christ to us, to assign unto him at his death such a
resolution as this:-- "I will now, by the oblation of myself, obtain
for all and every one peace and reconciliation with God, redemption
and everlasting salvation, eternal glory in the high heavens, even
for all those poor, miserable, wretched worms, condemned caitiffs,
that every hour ought to expect the sentence of condemnation ; and
all these shall truly and really be communicated to them if they
will believe. But yet, withal, I will so order things that
innumerable souls shall never bear one word of all this that I have
done for them, never be persuaded to believe, nor have the object of
faith that is to be believed proposed to them, whereby they might
indeed possibly partake of these-things?" Was this the mind and
will, this the design and purpose, of our merciful high priest? God
forbid. It is all one as if a prince should say and proclaim, that
whereas there be a number of captives held in sore in such a place,
and he hath a full treasure, he is resolved to redeem them every
one, so that every one of them shall come out of prison that will
thank him for his goodwill, and in the meantime never take care to
let these poor captives know his mind and pleasure; and yet be fully
assured that unless he effect it himself it will never be done.

Would not this be conceived a vain and ostentatious flourish,
without any good intent indeed towards the poor captives? Or as if a
physician should say that he hath a medicine that will cure all
diseases, and he intends to cure the diseases of all, but lets but
very few know his mind, or any thing of his medicine; and yet is
assured that without his relation and particular information it will
be known to very few. And shall he be supposed to desire, intend, or
aim at the recovery of all?

Now, it is most clear, from the Scripture and experience of all
ages, both under the old dispensation of the covenant and the new,
that innumerable men, whole nations, for a long season, are passed
by in the declaration of this mystery. The Lord doth not procure
that it shall, by any means, in the least measure be made out to
all; they hear not so much as a rumour or report of any such thing.
Under the Old Testament, "In Judah was God known, and his name was
great in Israel; in Salem was his tabernacle, and his dwelling-place
in Zion," Ps. 76:1, 2. "He showed his word unto Jacob, and his
statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with
any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them," Ps.
147:19, 20. Whence those appellations of the heathen, and
imprecations also-- as Jer. 10:25, "Pour out thy fury upon the
heathen that know thee not, and upon the families that call not upon
thy name;" of whom you have a full description, Eph.2:12, "Without
Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from
the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the
world." An d under the New Testament, though the church have
"lengthened her cords, and strengthened her stakes, "and "many
nations are come up to the mountain of the Lord,"--so many as to be
called "all people," "al l nations," yea, the "world," the "whole
world," in comparison of the small precinct of the church of the
Jews,--yet now also Scripture and experience do make it clear that
many are passed by, yea, millions of souls, that never bear a word
of Christ, nor of reconciliation by him; of which we can give no
other reason, but, "Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy
sight," Matt. 11:26. For the Scripture, ye have the Holy Ghost
expressly forbidding the apostles to go to sundry places with the
word, but sending them another way, Acts 16:6, 7, 9, 10; answerable
to the former dispensation in some particulars, wherein "he suffered
al l nations to walk in their own ways," chap. 14:16. And for
experience, no t to multiply particulars, do but ask any of our
brethren who have been but any time in the Indies, and they will
easily resolve you in the truth thereof.

The exceptions against this argument are poor and frivolous, which
we reserve for reply. In brief; how is it revealed to those
thousands of the offspring of infidels, whom the Lord cuts off in
their infancy, that they may not pester the world, persecute his
church, nor disturb human society? how to their parents, of whom
Paul affirms, that by the works of God they might be led to the
knowledge of his eternal power and Godhead, but that they should
know any thing of redemption or a Redeemer was utterly impossible?


CHAPTER II


Containing three other arguments.

Arg. III. If Jesus Christ died for all men,--that is, purchased and
procured for them, according to the mind and will of God, all those
things which we recounted, and the Scripture setteth forth, to be
the effects and fruits of his death, which may be summed up in this
one phrase, "eternal redemption," then he did this, and that
according to the purpose of God, either absolutely or upon some
condition by them to be fulfilled. If absolutely, then ought all and
every one, absolutely and infallibly, to be made actual partakers of
that eternal redemption so purchased; for what, I pray, should
hinder the enjoyment of that to any which God absolutely intended,
and Christ absolutely purchased for them? If upon condition, then he
did either procure this condition for them, or he did not? If he did
procure this condition for them,--that is, that it should be
bestowed on them and wrought within them,--then be did it either
absolutely again, or upon a condition. If absolutely, then are we as
we were before; for to procure any thing for another, to be
conferred on him upon such a condition, and withal to procure that
condition absolutely to be bestowed on him, is equivalent to the
absolute procuring of the thing itself. For so we affirm, in this
very business: Christ procured salvation for us, to be bestowed
conditionally, if we do believe; but faith itself, that he hath
absolutely procured, without prescribing of any condition. Whence we
affirm, that the purchasing of salvation for us is equivalent to
what it would have been if it had been so purchased as to have been
absolutely bestowed, in respect of the event and issue. So that thus
also must all be absolutely saved. But if this condition be procured
upon condition, let that be assigned, and we will renew our quaere
concerning the procuring of that, whether it were absolute or
conditional, and so never rest until they come to fix somewhere, or
still run into a circle.

But, on the other side, is not this condition procured by him on
whose performance all the good things purchased by him are to be
actually enjoyed? Then, first, This condition must be made known to
all, as Arg. II. Secondly, All men are able of themselves to perform
this condition, or they are not. If they are, then, seeing that
condition is faith in the promises, as is on all sides confessed,
are, all men of themselves, by the power of their own free-will,
able to believe; which is contrary to the Scriptures, as, by the
Lord's assistance, shall be declared. If they cannot, but that this
faith must be bestowed on them and wrought within them by the free
grace of God, then when God gave his Son to die for them, to procure
eternal redemption for them all, upon condition that they did
believe, be either purposed to work faith in them all by his grace,
that they might believe, or he did not? If he did, why doth not he
actually perform it, seeing "he is of one mind, and who can turn
him?" why do not all believe? why have not all men faith? Or doth he
fail of his purpose? If he did not purpose to bestow faith on them
all, or (which is all one) if he purposed not to bestow faith on all
(for the will of God doth not consist in a pure negation of any
thing,--what he doth not will that it should be, he wills that it
should not be), then the sum of it comes to this:--That God gave
Christ to die for all men, but upon this condition, that they
perform that which of themselves without him they cannot perform,
and purposed that, for his part, he would not accomplish it in them.

Now, if this be not extreme madness, to assign a will unto God of
doing that which himself knows and orders that it shall never be
done, of granting a thing upon a condition which without his help
cannot be fulfilled, and which help he purposed not to grant, let
all judge. Is this any thing but to delude poor creatures? Is it
possible that any good at all should arise to any by such a purpose
as this, such a giving of a Redeemer? Is it agreeable to the
goodness of God to intend so great a good as is the redemption
purchased by Christ, and to pretend that he would have it profitable
for them, when he knows that they can no more fulfil the condition
which he requires, that it may be by them enjoyed, than Lazarus
could of himself come out of the grave? Doth it beseem the wisdom of
God, to purpose that which he knows shall never be fulfilled? If a
man should promise to give a thousand pounds to a blind man upon
condition that he will open his eyes and see,--which he knows well
enough he cannot do,- were that promise to be supposed to come from
a heart-pitying of his poverty, and not rather from a mind to illude
and mock at his misery? If the king should promise to pay a ransom
for the captives at Algiers, upon condition that they would conquer
their tyrants and come away,--which he knows full well they cannot
do,--were this a kingly act? Or, as if a man should pay a price to
redeem captives, but not that their chains may be taken away,
without which they cannot come out of prison; or promise dead men
great rewards upon condition they live again of themselves;- are not
these to as much end as the obtaining of salvation for men upon
condition that they do believe, without obtaining that condition for
them? Were not this the assigning such a will and purpose as this to
Jesus Christ: "I will obtain eternal life to be bestowed on men, and
become theirs, by the application of the benefits of my death; but
upon this condition, that they do believe. But as I will not reveal
my mind and will in this business, nor this condition itself, to
innumerable of them, so concerning the rest I know they are no ways
able of themselves,--no more than Lazarus was to rise, or a blind
man is to see,--to perform the condition that I do require, and
without which none of the good things intended for them can ever
become theirs; neither will I procure that condition ever to be
fulfilled in them. That is, I do will that that shall be done which
I do not only know shall never be done, but that it cannot be done,
because I will not do that without which it can never be
accomplished"? Now, whether such a will and purpose as this beseem
the wisdom and goodness of our Saviour, let the reader judge. In
brief; an intention of doing good unto any one upon the performance
of such a condition as the intender knows is absolutely above the
strength of him of whom it is required,--especially if he know that
it can no way be done but by his concurrence, and he is resolved not
to yield that assistance --which is necessary to the actual
accomplishment of it,--is a vain fruitless flourish. That Christ,
then, should obtain of his Father eternal redemption, and the Lord
should through his Son intend it for them who shall never be made
partakers of it, because they cannot perform, and God and Christ
have purposed not to bestow, the condition on which alone it is to
be made actually theirs, is unworthy of Christ, and unprofitable to
them for whom it is obtained; which that any thing that Christ
obtained for the sons of men should be unto them, is a hard saying
indeed. Again; if God through Christ purpose to save all if they do
believe, because he died for all, and this faith be not purchased by
Christ, nor are men able of themselves to believe, how comes it to
pass that any are saved?

[If it be answered], "God bestows faith on some, not on others," I
reply, Is this distinguishing grace purchased for those some
comparatively, in respect of those that are passed by without it? If
it be, then did not Christ die equally for all, for he died that
some might have faith, not others; yea, in comparison, he cannot be
said to die for those other some at all, not dying that they might
have faith, without which he knew that all the rest would be
unprofitable and fruitless. But is it? not purchased for them by
Christ? Then have those that be saved no more to thank Christ for
than those that are damned; which were strange, and contrary to
Rev.1:5, 6, "Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in
his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his
Father," etc. For my part, I do conceive that Christ hath obtained
salvation for men, not upon condition if they would receive it, but
so fully and perfectly that certainly they should receive it. He
purchased salvation, to be bestowed on them that do believe; but
withal faith, that they might believe. Neither can it be objected,
that, according to our doctrine, God requires any thing of men that
they cannot do, yea, faith to believe in Christ: for,--First,
Commands do not signify what is God's intention should be done, but
what is our duty to do; which may be made known to us whether we be
able to perform it or not: it signifieth no intention or purpose of
God. Secondly, For the promises which are proposed together with the
command to believe:--First, they do not hold out the intent and
purpose of God, that Christ should die for us if we do believe;
which is absurd,--that the act should be the constituter of its own
object, which must be before it, and is presupposed to be before we
are desired to believe it: nor, secondly, the purpose of God that
the death of Christ should be profitable to as if we do believe;
which we before confuted: but, thirdly, only that faith is the way
to salvation which God hath appointed; so that all that do believe
shall undoubtedly be saved, these two things, faith and salvation,
being inseparably linked together, as shall be declared.

ARG. IV. If all mankind be, in and by the eternal purpose of God,
distinguished into two sorts and conditions, severally and
distinctly described and set forth in the Scripture, and Christ be
peculiarly affirmed to die for one of these sorts, and nowhere for
them of the other, then did he not die for all; for of the one sort
he dies for all and every one, and of the other for no one at all.
But,--

First, There is such a discriminating distinguishment among men, by
the eternal purpose of God, as those whom he "loves" and those whom
he "hates," Rom. 9:13; whom he "knoweth," and whom he "knoweth not
:" John 10:14, "I know my sheep;" 2 Tim. 2:19, "The Lord knoweth
them that are his;" Rom. 8:29, "Whom he did foreknow;" chap. 11:2,

"His people which he foreknew;" "I know you not," Matt. 25:12: so
John 13:18, "I Speak not of you all; I know whom I have chosen."
Those that are appointed to life and glory, and those that are
appointed to and fitted for destruction,-- "elect" and "reprobate;"
those that were "ordained to eternal life," and those who "before
were of old ordained to condemnation:" as Eph. 1:4 , "He hath chosen
us in him;" Acts 13:48, "Ordained to eternal life;" Rom. 8:30, "Whom
he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them
he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

So on the other side, l Thes. 5:9, "God hath not appointed us to
wrath, but to obtain salvation;" Rom. 9:18-21, "He hath mercy o n
whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt
say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted
his will? Nay but, 0 man, who art thou that repliest against God?
Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made
me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump
to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?" Jude 4,
"Ordained to this condemnation 2 Pet. 2:12, "Made to be taken and
destroyed;" "Sheep and goats," Matt 25:32; John 10 passim. Those on
whom he hath "mercy," and those whom he "hardenetb," Rom. 9:18.
Those that are his "peculiar people" and "the children of promise,"
that are "not of the world ," his "church;" and those that, in
opposition to them, are "the world," "not prayed for," "not his
people:" as Tit 2:14; Gal. 4:28; John 15:19, 17:9; Col. 1:24; John
9:52; Heb. 2:10, 12, 13. Which distinction of men is everywhere
ascribed to the purpose, will, and good pleasure of God: Prov. 16:4,
"The Lord hath made all things for himself, even the wicked for the
day of evil." Matt. 9:25, 26, "I thank thee, 0 Father, because thou
hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed
them unto babes. Even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy
sight." Rom. 9:11, 12, "The children being not yet born, neither
having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to
election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; it was
said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger." Verses 16, 17,
"So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but
of God that showeth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh,
Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show
my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all
the earth." chap. 8:28-30,"Who are the called according to his
purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be
conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born
among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he
also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he
justified them he also glorified." So that the first part of the
proposition is clear from the Scripture.

Now, Christ is said expressly and punctually to die for them on the
one side: for his "people," Matt. 1:21; his "sheep," John 10:11, 14;
his "church," Acts 20:28, Eph 5:25, as distinguished from the world,
Rom. 5:8, 9, John 11:51, 52; his "elect," Rom. 8:32-34; his
"children," Heb. 2:12, 13;- as before more at large. Whence we may
surely conclude that Christ died not for all and every one,--to wit,
not for those he "never knew," whom he "hateth," whom he
"hardeneth," on whom he "will not show mercy," who "were before of
old ordained to condemnation;" in a word, for a reprobate, for the
world, for which he would not pray. That which some except, that
though Christ be said to die for his "sheep," for his "elect," his
"chosen," yet he is not said to die for them only,-- that term is
nowhere expressed, is of no value; for is it not without any forced
interpretation, in common sense, and according to the usual course
of speaking, to distinguish men into two such opposite conditions as
elect and reprobate, sheep and goats, and then affirm that he died
for his elect, [is it not] equivalent to this, he died for his elect
only? Is not the sense as clearly restrained as if that restrictive
term had been added? Or is that term always added in the Scripture
in every indefinite assertion, which yet must of necessity be
limited and restrained as if it were expressly added? as where our
Saviour saith, " I am the way, the truth, and the life," John
14:6,--he doth not say that he only is so, and yet of necessity it
must be so understood. As also in that, Col. 1:19, "It pleased the
Father that in him should all fulness dwell;"--he doth not express
the limitation "only," and yet it were no less than blasphemy to
suppose a possibility of extending the affirmation to any other. So
that this exception, notwithstanding this argument, is, as far as I
can see, unanswerable; which also might be farther urged by a more
large explication of God's purpose of election and reprobation,
showing how the death of Christ was a means set apart and appointed
for the saving of his elect, and not at all undergone and suffered
for those which, in his eternal counsel, he did determine should
perish for their sins, and so never be made partakers of the
benefits thereof. But of this more must be spoken, if the Lord
preserve us, and give assistance for the other part of this
controversy, concerning the cause of sending Christ.

ARG. V. That is not to be asserted and affirmed which the Scripture
doth not anywhere go before us in; but the Scripture nowhere saith
Christ died for all men, much less for all and every man (between
which two there is a wide difference, as shall be declared):
therefore, this is not to be asserted. It is true, Christ is said to
give his life "a ransom for all," but nowhere for all men. And
because it is affirmed expressly in other places that he died for
many, for his church, for them that believe, for the children that
God gave him, for us, some of all sorts, though not expressly, yet
clearly in terms equivalent, Rev. 5:9, 10, it must be clearly proved
that where all is mentioned, it cannot be taken for all believers,
all his elect, his whole church, all the children that God gave him,
some of all sorts, before a universal affirmative can be thence
concluded. And if men will but consider the particular places, and
contain themselves until they have done what is required, we shall
be at quiet, I am persuaded, in this business.


CHAPTER III.


Containing, two other arguments from the person Christ sustained in
this business.

ARG. VI. For whom Christ died, he died as a sponsor, in their stead,
as is apparent, Rom. 5:6-8, "For when we were yet without strength,
in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a
righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some
would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in
that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" Gal. 3:13, "He
was made a curse for us." 2 Cor. 5:21, "He hath made him to be sin
for us." All which places do plainly signify and hold out a change
or commutation of persons, one being accepted in the room of the
other. Now, if he died as the sponsor or surety of them for whom he
died, in their stead, then these two things at least will follow:-
First, That he freed them from that anger, and wrath, and guilt of
death, which he underwent for them, that they should in and for him
be all reconciled, and be freed from the wherein they are by reason
of death; for no other reason in the world can be assigned why
Christ should undergo any thing in another's stead, but that that
other might be freed from undergoing that which he underwent for
him. And all justice requires that so it should be; which also is
expressly intimated, when our Saviour is said to be [ENGUOS], " a
surety of a better testament," Heb. 7:22; that is, by being our
priest, undergoing the "chastisement of our peace," and the burden
of our "iniquities," Isa. 53:5, 6. He was "made sin for us, that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor. 5:21, But now
all are not freed from wrath and the guilt of death, and actually
reconciled to God,--which is to be justified through an imputation
of righteousness, and a non-imputation of iniquities;--for until men
come to Christ "the wrath of God abideth on them," John 3:36; which
argueth and intimateth a nonremoval of wrath, by reason of not
believing. He doth not say, it comes on them, as though by Christ's
death they were freed from being under a state and condition of
wrath, which we are all in by nature, Eph. 2:3; [MENO], "it
remaineth," or abideth: it was never removed. And to them the gospel
is a savour of death unto death,--bringing a new death and a sore
condemnation, by its being despised, unto that death the guilt
whereof they before lay under. Some have, indeed, affirmed that all
and every one are redeemed, restored, justified, and made righteous
in Christ, and by his death; but truly this is so wretched, I will
not say perverting of the Scriptures, which give no colour to any
such assertion, but so direct an opposition to them, as I judge it
fruitless, and lost labour, to go about to remove such exceptions
(More, p. 45). Secondly, It follows that Christ made satisfaction
for the sins of all and every man, if be died for them; for the
reason why he underwent death for us as a surety was to make
satisfaction to God's justice for our sins, so to redeem us to
himself, neither can any other be assigned. But Christ hath not
satisfied the justice of God for all the sins of all and every man:
which may be made evident by divers reasons; for,--

First, For whose sins he made satisfaction to the justice of God,
for their sins justice is satisfied, or else his satisfaction was
rejected as insufficient, for no other reason can be assigned of
such a fruitless attempt; which to aver is blasphemy in the highest
degree. But now the justice of God is not satisfied for all the sins
of all and every man; which also is no less apparent than the
former: for they that must undergo eternal punishment themselves for
their sins, that the justice of God may be satisfied for their sins,
the justice of God was not satisfied without their own punishment,
by the punishment of Christ; for they are not heated by his stripes.
But that innumerable souls shall to eternity undergo the punishment
due to their own sins, I hope needs, with Christians, no proving.
Now, how can the justice of God require satisfaction of them for
their sins, if it were before satisfied for them in Christ? To be
satisfied, and to require satisfaction that it may be satisfied, are
contradictory, and cannot be affirmed of the same in respect of the
same; but that the Lord will require of some "the uttermost
farthing" is most clear, Matt, 5:26.

Secondly, Christ by undergoing death for us, as our surety,
satisfied for no more than he intended so to do. So great a thing as
satisfaction for the sins of men could not accidentally happen
besides his intention, will, and purpose; especially considering
that his intention and good-will, sanctifying himself to be an
oblation, was of absolute necessity to make his death an acceptable
offering. But now Christ did not intend to satisfy for the sins of
all and every man for innumerable souls were in hell, under the
punishment and weight of their own sins; from whence there is no
redemption before, nor actually then when our Saviour made himself
an oblation for sin. Now, shall we suppose that Christ would make
himself an offering for their sins whom he knew to be past recovery,
and that it was utterly impossible that ever they should have any
fruit or benefit by his offering? Shall we think that the blood of
the covenant was cast away upon them for whom our Saviour intended
no good at all? To intend good to them he could not, without a
direct opposition to the eternal decree of his Father, and therein
of his own eternal Deity. Did God send his Son, did Christ come to
die, for Cain and Pharaoh, damned so many ages before his suffering?
"Credat Apella?" The exception, that Christ died for them, and his
death would have been available to them if they had believed and
fulfilled the condition required, is, in my judgment, of no force at
all; for,--First, For the most part they never heard of any such
condition. Secondly, Christ at his death knew full well that they
bad not fulfilled the condition, and were actually cut off from any
possibility ever so to do, so that any intention to do them good by
his death must needs be vain and frustrate; which must not be
assigned to the Son of God. Thirdly, This redemption, conditionate,
if they believe, we shall reject anon.

Neither is that other exception, that Christ might as well satisfy
for them that were eternally damned at the time of his suffering
(for whom it could not be useful), as for them that were then
actually saved (for whom it was not needful), of any more value.
For--First, Those that were saved were saved upon this ground, that
Christ should certainly suffer for them in due time; which suffering
of his was as effectual in the purpose and promise as in the
execution and accomplishment. It was in the mind of God accounted
for them as accomplished, the compact and covenant with Christ about
it being surely ratified upon mutual, unchangeable promises,
(according to our conception); and so our Saviour was to perform it,
and so it was needful for them that were actually saved: but for
those that were actually damned, there was no such inducement to it,
or ground for it, or issue to be expected out of it. Secondly, A
simile will clear the whole:--If a man should send word to a place
where captives were in prison, that he would pay the price and
ransom that was due for their delivery, and to desire the prisoners
to come forth, for he that detains them accepts of his word and
engagement; when he comes to make payment, according to his promise,
if he find some to have gone forth according as was proposed, and
others continued obstinate in their dungeon, some hearing of what he
had done, others not, and that according to his own appointment, and
were now long since dead; doth he, in the payment of his promised
ransom, intend it for them that died stubbornly and obstinately in
the prison, or only for them who went forth? Doubtless, only for
these last. No more can the passion of Christ be supposed to be a
price paid for them that died in the prison of sin and corruption
before the payment of his ransom; though it might full well be for
them that were delivered by virtue of his engagement for the payment
of such a ransom. Thirdly, If Christ died in the stead of all men,
and made satisfaction for their sins, then he did it for all their
sins, or only for some of their sins. If for some only, who then can
be saved? If for all, why then are all not saved? They say it is
because of their unbelief; they will not believe, and therefore are
not saved. That unbelief, is it a sin, or is it not? If it be not,
how can it be a cause of damnation? If it be, Christ died for it, or
he did not, If he did not, then he died not for all the sins of all
men. If he did, why is this an obstacle to their salvation? Is there
any new shift to be invented for this? or must we be contented with
the old, namely, because they do not believe? that is, Christ did
not die for their unbelief, or rather, did not by his death remove
their unbelief, because they would not believe, or because they
would not themselves remove their unbelief; or he died for their
unbelief conditionally, that they were not unbelievers. These do not
seem to me to be sober assertions.

ARG. VII. For whom Christ died, for them he is a mediator: which is
apparent; for the oblation or offering of Christ, which he made of
himself unto God, in the shedding of his blood, was one of the
chiefest acts of his mediation. But he is not a mediator for all and
every one; which also is no less evident, because as mediator he is
the priest for them for whom he is a mediator. Now, to a priest it
belongs, as was declared before, to sacrifice and intercede, to
procure good things, and to apply them to those for whom they are
procured; as is evident, Heb. 9., And was proved before at large:
which confessedly, Christ doth not for all. Yea, that Christ is not
a mediator for every one needs no proof. Experience sufficiently
evinceth it, besides innumerable places of Scripture. It is, I
confess, replied by some, that Christ is a mediator for some in
respect of some acts, and not in respect of others; but truly, this,
if I am able to judge, is a dishonest subterfuge, that hath no
ground in Scripture, and would make our Saviour a half mediator in
respect of some, which is an unsavoury expression. But this argument
was vindicated before.


CHAPTER IV


Of sanctification, and of the cause of faith, and the procurement
thereof by the death of Christ.

ARG. VIII. Another argument may be taken from the effect and fruit
of the death of Christ unto sanctification, which we thus
propose:--If the blood of Jesus Christ doth wash, purge, cleanse,
and sanctify them for whom it was shed, or for whom he was a
sacrifice, then certainly he died, shed his blood, or was a
sacrifice, only for them that in the event are washed, purged,
cleansed, and sanctified;--which that all or every one is not is
most apparent, faith being the first principle of the heart's
purification, Acts 15:9, and "all men have not faith," 2 Thess.3:2;
it is "of the elect of God," Tit. 1:1. The consequence, I conceive,
is undeniable, and not to be avoided with any distinctions. But now
we shall make it evident that the blood of Christ is effectual for
all those ends of washing, purging, and sanctifying, which we before
recounted. And this we shall do;--first, from the types of it; and,
secondly, by plain expressions concerning the thing itself:--
First, For the type, that which we shall now consider is the
sacrifice of expiation, which the apostle so expressly compareth
with the sacrifice and oblation of Christ. Of this he affirmeth,
Heb. 9: 13, that it legally sanctified them for whom it was a
sacrifice. "For," saith he, "the blood of bulls and goats, and the
ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the
purifying of the flesh." Now, that which was done carnally and
legally in the type must be spiritually effected in the
antitype,--the sacrifice of Christ, typified by that bloody
sacrifice of beasts. This the apostle asserteth in the verse
following. "How much more," saith he, "shall the blood of Christ,
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God,
purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" If I
know anything, that answer of Arminius and some others to
this,--namely, that the sacrifice did sanctify, not as offered but
as sprinkled, and the blood of Christ, not in respect of the
oblation, but of its application, answereth it,--is weak and
unsatisfactory; for it only asserts a division between the oblation
and application of the blood of Christ, which, though we allow to be
distinguished, yet such a division we are now disproving. And to
weaken our argument, the same division which we disprove is
proposed; which, if any, is an easy, facile way of answering. We
grant that the blood of Christ sanctifieth in respect of the
application of the good things procured by it, but withal prove that
it is so applied to all for whom it was an oblation; and that
because it is said to sanctify and purge, and must answer the type,
which did sanctify to the purifying of the flesh.

Secondly, It is expressly, in divers places affirmed of the
blood-shedding and death of our Saviour, that it doth effect these
things, and that it was intended for that purpose. Many places for
the clearing of this were before recounted. I shall now repeat so
many of them as shall be sufficient to give strength to the argument
in hand, omitting those which before were produced, only desiring
that all those places which point out the end of the death of Christ
may be considered as of force to establish the truth of this
argument.
Rom. 6:5, 6, "For if we have been planted together in the likeness
of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body
of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."
The words of the latter verse yield a reason of the former assertion
in verse 5,--namely, that a participation in the death of Christ
shall certainly be accompanied with conformity to him in his
resurrection; that is, both to life spiritual, as also to eternal:
"Because our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin
might be destroyed." That is, our sinful corruption and depravation
of nature are, by his death and crucifying, effectually and
meritoriously slain, and disabled from such a rule and dominion over
us as that we should be servants any longer unto them; which is
apparently the sense of the place, seeing it is laid as a foundation
to press forward unto all decrees of sanctification and freedom from
the power of sin.

The same apostle also tells us, 2 Cor. 1:20, that "all the promises
of God are in him yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by
us." "Yea, and Amen,"- confirmed, ratified, unchangeably
established, and irrevocably made over to us. Now, this was done "in
him,"--that is, in his death and blood-shedding, for the
confirmation of the testament, whereof these promises are the
conveyance of the legacies to us,- confirmed by the "death of him,
the testator," Heb. 9:16: for he was "the surety of this better
testament," chap. 7:22; which testament or "covenant he confirmed
with many," by his being "cut off" for them, Dan. 9:26, 27. Now,
what are the promises that are thus confirmed unto us, and
established by the blood of Christ? The sum of them you have, Jer.
31:33,34; whence they are repeated by the apostle, Heb. 8:10-12, to
set out the nature of that covenant which was ratified in the blood
of Jesus, in which you have a summary description of all that free
grace towards us, both in sanctification, verses 10, 11, and in
justification, verse 12. Amongst these promises, also, is that most
famous one of circumcising our hearts, and of giving new hearts and
spirits unto us: as Deut. 30:6; Ezek. 36:26. So that our whole
sanctification, holiness, with justification and reconciliation unto
God, is procured by, and established unto us with, unchangeable
promises in the death and blood-shedding of Christ, "the heavenly or
spiritual thinks being purified with that sacrifice of his, Heb.
9:23; "For we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of sins," Col 1:14; "By death he destroyed him that had
the power of death, that is, the devil," that he might "deliver them
who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime subject to ,"
Heb. 2:14, 15.

Do but take notice of those two most clear places, Tit. 2:14, Eph.
5: 25, 26: in both which our cleansing and sanctification is
assigned to be the end and intendment of Christ the worker; and
therefore the certain effect of his death and oblation, which was
the work, as was before proved. And I shall add but one place more
to prove that which I am sorry that I need produce any one to
do,--to wit, that the blood of Christ purgeth us from all our sin,
and it is, I Cor. 1:30, "Who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." Of which,
because it is clear enough, I need not spend time to prove that he
was thus made unto us of God, inasmuch as he set him forth to be "a
propitiation through faith in his blood;" a's Rom. 3:25. So that our
sanctification, with all other effects of free grace, are the
immediate procurement of the death of Christ. And of the things that
have been spoken this is the sum:--Sanctification and holiness is
the certain fruit and effect of the death of Christ in all them for
whom he died; but all and every one are not partakers of this
sanctification, this purging, cleansing, and working of holiness:
therefore, Christ died not for all and every one, "quod erat
demonstrandum."

It is altogether in vain to except, as some do, that the death of
Christ is not the sole cause of these things, for they are not
actually wrought in any without the intervention of the Spirit's
working in them, and faith apprehending the death of Christ:
for,--First, Though many total causes of the same kind cannot concur
to the producing of the same effect, yet several causes of several
kinds may concur to one effect, and be the sole causes in that kind
wherein they are causes. The Spirit of God is the cause of
sanctification and holiness; but what kind of cause, I pray? Even
such an one as is immediately and really efficient of the effect.
Faith is the cause of pardon of sin; but what cause? In what kind?
Why merely as an instrument, apprehending the righteousness of
Christ. Now, do these causes, whereof one is efficient, the other
instrumental, both natural and real, hinder that the blood of Christ
may not only concur, but also be the sole cause, moral and
meritorious, of these things? Doubtless, they do not. Nay, they do
suppose it so to be, or else they would in this work be neither
instruments nor efficient, that being the sole foundation of the
Spirit's operation and efficience, and the sole cause of faith's
being and existence. A man is detained captive by his enemy, and one
goes to him that detains him, and pays a ransom for his delivery;
who thereupon grants a warrant to the keepers of the prison that
they shall knock off his shackles, take away his rags, let him have
new clothes, according to the agreement, saying, "Deliver him, for I
have found a ransom." Because the jailer knocks off his shackles,
and the warrant of the judge is brought for his discharge, shall he
or we say that the price and ransom which was paid was not the
cause, yes, the sole cause of his delivery? Considering that none of
these latter had been, had not the ransom been paid, they are no
less the effect of that ransom than his own delivery. In our
delivery from the of sin, it is true, there are other things, in
other kinds, which do concur besides the death of Christ, as the
operation of the Spirit and the grace of God; but these being in one
kind, and that in another, these also being no less the fruit and
effect of the death of Christ than our deliverance wrought by them,
it is most apparent that that is the only main cause of the whole.
Secondly, To take off utterly this exception, with all of the like
kind, we affirm that faith itself is a proper immediate fruit and
procurement of the death of Christ in all them for whom he died;
which (because, if it be true, it utterly overthrows the general
ransom, or universal redemption; and if it be not true, I will very
willingly lay down this whole controversy, and be very indifferent
which way it be determined, for go it which way it will, free-will
must be established), I will prove apart by itself in the next
argument.

ARG. IX. Before I come to press the argument intended, I must
premise some few things; as,---

1. Whatever is freely bestowed upon us, in and through Christ, that
is all wholly the procurement and merit of the death of Christ.
Nothing is bestowed through him on those that are his which he hath
not purchased; the price whereby he made his purchase being his own
blood, I Pet. 1: 18,19; for the covenant between his Father and him,
of making out all spiritual blessings to them that were given unto
him, was expressly founded on this condition, "That he should make
his soul an offering for sin," Isa. 53:10.

2. That confessedly, on all sides, faith is, in men of
understanding, of such absolute indispensable necessity unto
salvation,--there being no sacrifice to be admitted for the want of
it under the new covenant,--that, whatever God hath done in his
love, sending his Son, and whatever Christ hath done or doth, in his
oblation and intercession for all or some, without this in us, is,
in regard of the event, of no value, worth, or profit unto us, but
serveth only to increase and aggravate condemnation; for, whatsoever
is accomplished besides, that is most certainly true, "He that
believeth not shall be damned," Mark 16:16. (So that if there is in
ourselves a power of believing, and the act of it do proceed from
that power, and is our own also, then certainly and undeniably it is
in our power to make the love of God and death of Christ effectual
towards us or not, and that by believing we actually do the one by
an act of our own; which is so evident that the most ingenious and
perspicacious of our adversaries have in terms confessed it, as I
have declared elsewhere). Such being, then, the absolute necessity
of faith, it seems to me that the cause of that must needs be the
prime and principal cause of salvation, as being the cause of that
without which the whole would not be, and by which the whole is, and
is effectual.

3. I shall give those that to us in this are contrary-minded their
choice and option, so that they will answer directly, categorically,
and without uncouth, insignificant, cloudy distinctions, whether our
saviour, by his death and intercession (which we proved to be
conjoined), did merit or procure faith for us, or no? or, which is
all one, whether faith be a fruit and effect of the death of Christ,
or no? And according to their answer I will proceed.

First, If they answer affirmatively that it is, or that Christ did
procure it by his death (provided always that they do not wilfully
equivocate, and when I speak of faith as it is a grace in a
particular person, taking it subjectively, they understand faith as
it is the doctrine of faith, or the way of salvation declared in the
gospel, taking it objectively, which is another thing, and beside
the present question; although, by the way, I must tell them that we
deny the granting of that new way of salvation, in bringing life and
immortality to light by the gospel in Christ, to be procured for us
by Christ, himself being the chiefest part of this way, yea, the way
itself: and that he should himself be procured by his own death and
oblation is a very strange, contradictory assertion, beseeming them
who have used it (More, p.35.) It is true, indeed, a full and
plenary carrying of his elect to life and glory by that way we
ascribe to him, and maintain it against all; but the granting of
that way was of the same free grace and unprocured love which was
also the cause of granting himself unto us, Gen. 3:15.);--if, I say,
they answer thus affirmatively, then I demand whether Christ
procured faith for all for whom he died absolutely, or upon some
condition on their part to be fulfilled? If absolutely, then surely,
if he died for all, they must all absolutely believe; for that which
is absolutely procured for any is absolutely his, no doubt. He that
hath absolutely procured an inheritance, by what means soev'er, who
can hinder, that it should not be his? But this is contrary to that
of the apostle, "All men have not faith," 2 Thess 3:2; and, "Faith
is of the elect of God," Tit. 1:1. If they say that he procured it
for them, that is, to be bestowed on them conditionally, I desire
that they would answer bona fide, and roundly, in terms without
equivocation or blind distinctions, assign that condition, that we
may know what it is, seeing it is a thing of so infinite concernment
to all our souls. Let me know this condition which ye will maintain,
and en herbam amici! (I own myself conquered--Facciolati) the cause
is yours Is it, as some say, if they do not resist the grace of God?
Now, what is it not to resist the grace of God? is it not to obey
it? And what is it to obey the grace of God?, is it not to believe?
So the condition of faith is faith itself. Christ procured that they
should believe, upon condition that they do believe! Are these
things so? But they can assign a condition, on our part required, of
faith, that is not faith itself. Can they do it? Let us hear it,
then, and we will renew our inquiry concerning that condition,
whether it be procured by Christ or no. If not, then is the cause of
faith still resolved into ourselves; Christ is not the author and
finisher of it. If it be then are we just where we were before, and
must follow with our queries whether that condition was procured
absolutely or upon condition. Depinge ube sistam.

But, secondly, if they will answer negatively, as, agreeably to
their own principles, they ought to do, and deny that faith is
procured by the death of Christ, then,---

1. They must maintain that it is an act of our own wills, so our own
as not to be wrought in us by grace; and that it is wholly situated
in our power to perform that spiritual act, nothing being bestowed
upon us by free grace, in and through Christ (as was before
declared), but what by him, in his death and oblation, was procured:
which is contrary,--(1.) To express Scripture in exceeding many
places, which I shall not recount: (2.) To the very nature of the
being of the new covenant, which doth not prescribe and require the
condition of it, but effectually work it in all the covenantees,
Jer. 31:33, 34; Ezek. 36:26; Heb. 8:10, 11: (3.) To the advancement
of the free grace of God, in setting up the power of free-will, in
the state of corrupted nature, to the slighting and undervaluing
thereof. (4.) To the received doctrine of our natural depravedness
and disability to any thing that is good; yea, by evident unstrained
consequence, overthrowing that fundamental article of original sin:
yea, (5.) To right reason, which will never grant that the natural
faculty is able of itself, without some spiritual elevation, to
produce an act purely spiritual; as I Cor. 2:14.

2. They must resolve almost the sole cause of our salvation into
ourselves ultimately, it being in our own power to make all that God
and Christ do unto that end effectual, or to frustrate their utmost
endeavours for that purpose: for all that is done, whether in the
Father's loving us and sending his Son to die for us, or in the
Son's offering himself for an oblation in our stead, or for us (in
our behalf), is confessedly, as before, of no value nor worth, in
respect of any profitable issue, unless we believe; which that we
shall do, Christ hath not effected nor procured by his death,
neither can the Lord so work it in us but that the sole casting
voice (if I may so say), whether we will believe or no, is left to
ourselves. Now, whether this be not to assign unto ourselves the
cause of our own happiness, and to make us the chief builders of our
own glory, let all judge.

These things being thus premised, I shall briefly prove that which
is denied, namely, that faith is procured for us by the death of
Christ; and so, consequently, he died not for all and every one, for
"all men have not faith:" and this we may do by these following
reasons;---

1. The death of Jesus Christ purchased holiness and sanctification
for us, as was at large proved, Arg. VIII; but faith, as it is a
grace of the Spirit inherent in us, is formally a part of our
sanctification and holiness: therefore he procured faith for us. The
assumption is meet certain, and not denied; the proposition was
sufficiently confirmed in the foregoing argument; and I see not what
may be excepted against the truth of the whole. If any shall except,
and say that Christ might procure for us some part of holiness (for
we speak of parts, and not of degrees and measure), but not all, as
the sanctification of hope, love, meekness, and the like, I
ask,--first, What warrant have we for any such distinction between
the graces of the Spirit, that some of them should be of the
purchasing of Christ, others of our own store? secondly, Whether we
are more prone of ourselves to believe, and more able, than to love
and hope? and where may we have a ground for that?

2. All the fruits of election are purchased for us by Jesus Christ;
for "we are chosen in him," Eph. 1:4, as the only cause and fountain
of all those good things which the Lord chooseth us to, for the
praise of his glorious grace, that in all things be might have the
preeminence. I hope I need not be solicitous about the proving of
this, that the Lord Jesus is the only way and means by and for whom
the Lord will certainly and actually collate upon his elect all the
fruits and effects or intendments of that love whereby he chose
them. But now faith is a fruit, a principal fruit, of our election;
for saith the apostle, "We are chosen in him before the foundation
of the world, that we should be holy," Eph. 1:4,--of which holiness,
faith, purifying the heart, is a principal share. "Moreover, whom he
did predestinate, them he also called," Rom. 8:30; that is, with
that calling which is according to his purpose, effectually working
faith in them by the mighty operation of his Spirit, "according to
the exceeding greatness of his power," Eph.1:9. And so they
"believe" (God making them differ from others, I Cor. 4:7, in the
enjoyment of the means) "who are ordained to eternal life," Acts
13:48. Their being ordained to eternal life was the fountain from
whence their faith did flow; and so "the election hath obtained, and
the rest were blinded," Rom. 9:7.

3. All the blessings of the new covenant are procured and purchased
by him in whom the promises thereof are ratified, and to whom they
are made; for all the good things thereof are contained in and
exhibited by those promises, through the working of the Spirit of
God. Now, concerning the promises of the covenant, and their being
confirmed in Christ, and made unto his, as Gal. 3:16, with what is
to be understood in those expressions, was before declared.
Therefore, all the good things of the covenant are the effects,
fruits, and purchase of the death of Christ, he and all things for
him being the substance and whole of it. Farther; that faith is of
the good things of the new covenant is apparent from the description
thereof, Jer. 31:33, 34; Heb. 8:10-12; Ezek. 36:25-27, with divers
other places, as might clearly be manifested if we affected
copiousness in causa facili.

4. That without which it is utterly impossible that we should be
saved must of necessity be procured by him by whom we are fully and
effectually saved. Let them that can, declare how he can be said to
procure salvation fully and effectually for us, and not be the
author and purchaser of that (for he is the author of our salvation
by the way of purchase) without which it is utterly impossible we
should attain salvation. Now, without faith it is utterly impossible
that ever any should attain salvation, Heb. 11:6, Mark 16:16; but
Jesus Christ, according to his name, doth perfectly save us, Matt.
1:21, procuring for us "eternal redemption," Heb. 9:12, being, "able
to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him," chap.
7:25: and therefore must faith also be within the compass of those
things that are procured by him.

5. The Scripture is clear, in express terms, and such as are so
equivalent that they are not liable to any evasion; as Phil. 1:29,
"It is given unto us, (HUPER CHRISTOS), on the behalf of Christ, for
Christ's sake, to believe on him." Faith, or belief, is the gift,
and Christ the procurer of it: "God hath blessed us with all
spiritual blessings in him in heavenly places," Eph. 1:3. If faith
be a spiritual blessing, it is bestowed on us "in him," and so also
for his sake; if it be not, it is not worth contending about in this
sense and way: so that, let others look which way they will, I
desire to look unto Jesus as the "author and finisher of our faith,"
Heb. 12:2. Divers other reasons, arguments, and places of Scripture
might be added for the confirmation of this truth; but I hope I have
said enough, and do not desire to say all. The sum of the whole
reason may be reduced to this head,- -namely, if the fruit and
effect procured and wrought by the death of Christ absolutely, not
depending on any condition in man to be fulfilled, be not common to
all, then did not Christ die for all; but the supposal is true, as
is evident in the grace of faith, which being procured by the death
of Christ, to be absolutely bestowed on them for whom he died, is
not common to all: therefore, our Saviour did not die for all.

ARG. X. We argue from the type to the antitype, or the thing
signified by it; which will evidently restrain the oblation of
Christ to God's elect. The people of Israel were certainly, in all
remarkable things that happened unto them, typical of the church of
God; as the apostle at large [declares], l Cor.10:11. Especially
their institutions and ordinances were all representative of the
spiritual things of the gospel; their priests, altar, sacrifices,
were but all shadows of the good things to come in Jesus Christ;
their Canaan was a type of heaven, Heb. 4:3, 9; as also Jerusalem or
Sion, Gal. 4:26, Heb. 12:22. The whole people itself was a type of
God's church, his elect, his chosen and called people: whence as
they were called a "holy people, a royal priesthood;" so also, in
allusion to them, are believers, I Pet. 2:5, 9 Yea, God's people are
in innumerable places called his "Israel," as it is farther
expounded, Heb. 8:8. A true Israelite is as much as a true believer,
John 1:47; and he is a Jew who is so in the hidden man of the heart.
I hope it need not be proved that that people, as delivered from ,
preserved, taken nigh unto God, brought into Canaan, was typical of
God's spiritual church, of elect believers. Whence we thus
argue:--Those only are really and spiritually redeemed by Jesus
Christ who were designed, signified, typified by the people of
Israel in their carnal, typical redemption (for no reason in the
world can be rendered why some should be typed out in the same
condition, partakers of the same good, and not others); but by the
people of the Jews, in their deliverance from Egypt, bringing into
Canaan, with all their ordinances and institutions, only the elect,
the church of God, was typed out, as was before proved. And, in
truth, it is the most senseless thing in the world, to imagine that
the Jews were under a type to all the whole world, or indeed to any
but Gods chosen ones, as is proved at large, Heb. 9:10. Were the
Jews and their ordinances types to the seven nations whom they
destroyed and supplanted in Canaan? were they so to Egyptians,
infidels, and haters of God and his Christ? We conclude, then,
assuredly, from that just proportion that ought to be observed
between the types and the things typified, that only the elect of
God, his church and chosen ones, are redeemed by Jesus Christ.


CHAPTER V.


Being a continuance of arguments from the nature and description of
the thing in hand; and first, of redemption.

ARG. XI. That doctrine which will not by any means suit with nor be
made conformable to the thing signified by it, and the expression,
literal and deductive, whereby in Scripture it is held out unto us,
but implies evident contradictions unto them, cannot possibly be
sound and sincere, as is the milk of the word. But now such is this
persuasion of universal redemption; it can never be suited nor
fitted to the thing itself, or redemption, nor to those expressions
whereby in the Scripture it is held out unto us. Universal
redemption, and yet many to die in captivity, is a contradiction
irreconcilable in itself.

To manifest this, let us consider some of the chiefest words and
phrases whereby the matter concerning which we treat is delivered in
the Scripture, such as are, redemption, reconciliation,
satisfaction, merit, dying for us, bearing our sins,
suretiship,--his being God, a common person, a Jesus, saving to the
utmost, a sacrifice putting away sin, and the like; to which we may
add the importance of some prepositions and other words used in the
original about this business: and doubt not but we shall easily find
that the general ransom, or rather universal redemption, will hardly
suit to any o them; but it is too long for the bed, and must be
cropped at the head or heels.

Begin we with the word REDEMPTION itself, which we will consider,
name and thing. Redemption, which in the Scripture is LUTROSIS
sometimes, but most frequently APOLUTROSIS, is the delivery of any
one from captivity and misery by the intervention LUTRON, of a price
or ransom. That this ransom, or price of our deliverance, was the
blood of Christ is evident; he calls it LUTRON, Matt. 20:28; and [it
is called] ANTILUTRON, I Tim. 2:6,- that is, the price of such a
redemption, that which was received as a valuable consideration for
our dismission. Now, that which is aimed at in the payment of this
price is, the deliverance of those from the evil wherewith they were
oppressed for whom the price is paid; it being in this spiritual
redemption as it is in corporal and civil, only with the alteration
of some circumstances, as the nature of the thing enforceth. This
the Holy Spirit manifesteth by comparing the "blood of Christ" in
this work of redemption with "silver and gold," and such other
things as are the intervening ransom in civil redemption, l Pet.
1:18,19. The evil wherewith we were oppressed was the punishment
which we had deserved;--that is, the satisfaction required when the
debt is sin; which also we are, by the payment of this price,
delivered from; so Gal. 3:13: for we are "justified freely by his
grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," Rom. 3: 24;
"in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of
sins," Eph. 1:7; Col 1:14. Free justification from the guilt, and
pardon of sin, in the deliverance from the punishment due unto it,
is the effect of the redemption procured by the payment of the price
we before mentioned: as if a man should have his friend in , and he
should go and lay out his estate to pay the price of his freedom
that is set upon his head by him that detains him, and so set him at
liberty. Only, as was before intimated, this spiritual redemption
hath some supereminent things in it, that are not to be found in
other deliverances; as,--

First, He that receives the ransom doth also give it. Christ is a
propitiation to appease and atone the Lord, but the Lord himself set
him forth so to be, Rom. 3:24, 25; whence he himself is often said
to redeem us. His love is the cause of the price in respect of its
procurement, and his justice accepts of the price in respect of its
merit; for Christ "came down from heaven to do the will of him that
sent him," John 6:3 8; Heb. 10:9,10. It is otherwise in the
redemption amongst men, where he that receives the ransom hath no
hand in the providing of it.

Secondly, The captive or prisoner is not so much freed from his
power who detains him as brought into his favour. When a captive
amongst men is redeemed, by the payment of a ransom, he is instantly
to be set free from the power and authority of him that did detain
him; but in this spiritual redemption, upon the payment of the
ransom for us, which is the blood of Jesus, we are not removed from
God, but are "brought nigh" unto him, Eph. 2:13,--not delivered from
his power, but restored to his favour,--our misery being a
punishment by the way of banishment as well as thraldom.

Thirdly, As the judge was to be satisfied, so the jailer was to be
conquered; God, the judge, giving him leave to fight for his
dominion, which was wrongfully usurped, though that whereby he had
it was by the Lord justly inflicted, and his thraldom by us rightly
deserved, Heb. 2:14; Col. 2:15. And he lost his power, as strong as
he was, for striving to grasp more than he could hold; for the
foundation of his kingdom being sin, assaulting Christ who did no
sin, he lost his power over them that Christ came to redeem, having
no part in him. So was the strong man bound, and his house spoiled.

In these and some few other circumstances is our spiritual
redemption diversified from civil; but for the main it answers the
word in the propriety thereof, according to the use that it hath
amongst men. Now, there is a twofold way whereby this is in the
Scripture expressed: for sometimes our Saviour is said to die for
our redemption, and sometimes for the redemption of our
transgressions; both tending to the same purpose,--yea, both
expressions, as I conceive, signify the same thing. Of the latter
you have an example, Heb. 9:15. He died EIS APOLUTROSIS PARABASIS
which, say some, is a metonymy, transgressions being put for
transgressors; others, that it is a proper expression for the paying
of a price whereby we may be delivered from the evil of our
transgressions. The other expression you have, Eph. 1:7, and in
divers other places, where the words LUTRON and APOLUTROSIS do
concur; as also Matt. 20:28, and Mark 10:45. Now, these words,
especially that of ANTILUTRON, I Tim. 2:6, do always denote, by the
not-to-be-wrested, genuine signification of them, the payment of a
price, or an equal compensation, in lieu of something to be done or
grant made by him to whom that price is paid. Having given these few
notions concerning redemption in general, let us now see how
applicable it is unto general redemption.

Redemption is the freeing of a man from misery by the intervention
of a ransom, as appeareth. Now, when a ransom is paid for the
liberty of a prisoner, is it not all the justice in the world that
he should have and enjoy the liberty so purchased for him by a
valuable consideration? If I should pay a thousand pounds for a
man's deliverance from to him that detains him, who hath power to
set him free, and is contented with the price I give, were it not
injurious to me and the poor prisoner that his deliverance be not
accomplished? Can it possibly be conceived that there should be a
redemption of men, and those men not redeemed? that a price should
be paid, and the purchase not consummated? Yet all this must be made
true, and innumerable other absurdities, if universal redemption be
asserted. A price is paid for all, yet few delivered; the redemption
of all consummated, yet few of them redeemed; the judge satisfied,
the jailer conquered ,and yet the prisoner inthralled! Doubtless,
"universal" and "redemption," where the greatest part of men perish,
are as irreconcilable as "Roman" and "Catholic." If there be a
universal redemption of all, then all men are redeemed. If they are
redeemed, then are they delivered from all misery, virtually or
actually, whereunto they were inthralled, and that by the
intervention of a ransom. Why, then, are not all saved? In a word,
the redemption wrought by Christ being the full deliverance of the
persons redeemed from all misery, wherein they were inwrapped, by
the price of his blood, it cannot possibly be conceived to be
universal unless all be saved; so that the opinion of the
Universalists is unsuitable to redemption.


CHAPTER VI.


Of the nature of reconciliation, and the argument taken from thence.

ARG. XII. Another thing ascribed to the death of Christ, and, by the
consent of all, extending itself unto all for whom he died, is
RECONCIATION. This in the Scripture is clearly proposed under a
double notion; first, of God to us; secondly, of us to God;--both
usually ascribed to the death and blood-shedding of Jesus Christ:
for those who were "enemies he reconciled in the body of his flesh
through death," Col 1:21, 22. And, doubtless these things do exactly
answer one another. All those to whom he hath reconciled God, he
doth also reconcile unto God: for unless both be effected, it cannot
be said to be a perfect reconciliation; for how can it be, if peace
be made only on the one side? Yea, it is utterly impossible that a
division of these two can be rationally apprehended: for if God be
reconciled, not man, why doth not he reconcile him, seeing it is
confessedly in his power; and if man should be reconciled, not God,
how can he be ready to receive all that come unto him? Now, that God
and all and every one in the world are actually reconciled, and made
at peace in Jesus Christ, I hope will not be affirmed. But to clear
this, we must a little consider the nature of reconciliation as it
is proposed to us in the gospel; unto which, also, some light may be
given from the nature of the thing itself, and the use of the word
in civil things.

Reconciliation is the renewing of friendship between parties before
at variance, both parties being properly said to be reconciled, even
both he that offendeth and he that was offended. God and man were
set at distance, at enmity and variance, by sin. Man was the party
offending, God offended, and the alienation was mutual, on either
side;--but yet with this difference, that man was alienated in
respect of affections, the ground and cause of anger and enmity; God
in respect of the effects and issue of anger and enmity. The word in
the New Testament is KATALLAGE, and the verb KATALLASSO,
reconciliation, to reconcile; both from ALLASSO, to change, or to
turn from one thing, one mind, to another: whence the first native
signification of those words is permutatio and permutare, because
most commonly those that are reconciled are changed in respect of
their affections, always in respect of the distance and variance,
and in respect of the effects; thence it signifieth reconciliation,
and to reconcile. And the word may not be affirmed of any business,
or of any men, until both parties are actually reconciled, and all
differences removed in respect of any former grudge and ill-wiLL. If
one be well pleased With the other, and that other continue
unappeased and implacable, there is no reconciliation. When our
Saviour gives that command, that he that brought his gift to the
altar, and there remembered that his brother had aught against
him,--was offended with him for any cause, --he should go and be
reconciled to him, [he] fully intendeth a mutual returning of minds
one to another, especially respecting, the appeasing and atoning of
him that was offended. Neither are these words used among men in any
other sense, but always denote, even in common speech, a full
redintegration of friendship between dissenting parties, with
reference most times to some compensation made to the offended
party. The reconciling of the one party and the other may be
distinguished, but both are required to make up an entire
reconciliation.

As, then, the folly of Socinus and his sectaries is remarkable, who
would have the reconciliation mentioned in the Scripture to be
nothing but our conversion to God, without the appeasing of his
anger and turning away his wrath from us,--which is a reconciliation
hopping on one leg,--so that distinction of some between the
reconciliation of God to man, making that to be universal towards
all, and the reconciliation of man to God, making that to be only of
a small number of those to whom God is reconciled, is a no less
monstrous figment. Mutual alienation must have mutual
reconciliation, seeing they are correlata. The state between God and
man, before the reconciliation made by Christ, was a state of
enmity. Man was at enmity with God; we were his "enemies," Col.
1:21; Rom. 5:10; hating him and opposing ourselves to him, in the
highest rebellion, to the utmost of our power. God also was thus far
an enemy to us, that his "wrath" was on us, Eph. 2:3; which
remaineth on us until we do believe, John 3:36. To make perfect
reconciliation (which Christ is aid in many places to do), it is
required, first, That the wrath of God be turned away, his anger
removed, and all the effects of enmity on his part towards us;
secondly, That we be turned away from our opposition to him, and
brought into voluntary obedience. Until both these be effected,
reconciliation is not perfected. Now, both these are in the
Scripture assigned to our Saviour, as the effects of his death and
sacrifice.

1. He turned away the wrath of God from us, and so appeased him
towards us; that was the reconciling of God by his death: for "when
we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son,"
Rom. 5:10. That here is meant the reconciling of God, as that part
of reconciliation which consisteth in turning away his wrath from
us, is most apparent, it being that whereby God chiefly commendeth
his love to us, which certainly is in the forgiveness of sin, by the
aversion of his anger due to it; as also being opposed to our being
saved from the wrath to come, in the latter end of the verse, which
compriseth our conversion and whole reconciliation to God. Besides,
verse 11, we are said to receive this "reconciliation" (which, I
know not by what means, we have translated "atonement"); which
cannot be meant of our reconciliation to God, or conversion, which
we cannot properly be said to accept or receive, but of him to us,
which we receive when it is apprehended by faith.

2. He turneth us away from our enmity towards God, redeeming and
reconciling us to God by "the blood of his cross," Col. 1:20;--to
wit, then meritoriously, satisfactorily, by the way of acquisition
and purchase; accomplishing it in due time actually and efficiently
by his Spirit. Both these ye have jointly mentioned, 2 Cor. 5:18-20;
where we may see, first, God being reconciled to us in Christ.,
which consisteth in a non-imputation of iniquities, and is the
subject-matter of the ministry, verses 18,19; secondly, the
reconciling of us to God, by accepting the pardon of our sins, which
is the end of the ministry, verse 20;--as the same is also at large
declared, Eph. 2:13-15. The actual, then, and effectual
accomplishment of both these, "simul et semel," in respect of
procurement, by continuance, and in process of time, in the
ordinances of the gospel, in respect of final accomplishment on the
part of men, do make up that reconciliation which is the effect of
the death of Christ; for so it is in many places assigned to be: "We
are reconciled to God by the death of his Son," Rom. 5:10; "And you,
that were sometime alienated, hath he reconciled in the body of his
flesh through death," Col. 1:21, 22: which is in sundry places so
evident in the Scripture, that none can possibly deny reconciliation
to be the immediate effect and product of the death of Christ.
Now, how this reconciliation can possibly be reconciled with
universal redemption, I am no way able to discern; for if
reconciliation be the proper effect of the death of Christ, as is
confessed by all, then if he died for all, I ask how cometh it to
pass,--First, That God is not reconciled to all? as he is not, for
his wrath abideth on some, John 3:36, and reconciliation is the
aversion of wrath. Secondly, That all are not reconciled to God? as
they are not, for "by nature all are the children of wrath," Eph.
2:3; and some all their lives do nothing but "treasure up wrath
against the day of wrath," Rom. 2:5. Thirdly, How, then, can it be
that reconciliation should be wrought between God and all men, and
yet neither God reconciled to all nor all reconciled to God?

Fourthly, If God be reconciled to all, when doth be begin to be
unreconciled towards them that perish? by what alteration is it? in
his will or nature? Fifthly, If all be reconciled by the death of
Christ, when do they begin to be unreconciled who perish, being born
children of wrath? Sixthly, Seeing that reconciliation on the part
of God consists in the turning, away of his wrath and not imputing
of iniquity, 2 Cor. 5:18, 19, which is justification, rendering us
blessed, Rom. 4:6-8, why, if God be reconciled to all, are not all
justified and made blessed through a non-imputation of their sin?
They who have found out a redemption where none are redeemed, and a
reconciliation where none are reconciled, can easily answer these
and such other questions; which to do I leave them to their leisure,
and in the meantime conclude this part of our argument. That
reconciliation which is the renewing of lost friendship, the slaying
of enmity, the making up of peace, the appeasing of God, and turning
away of his wrath, attended with a non-imputation of iniquities;
and, on our part, conversion to God by faith and repentance;--this,
I say, being that reconciliation which is the effect of the death
and blood of Christ, it cannot be asserted in reference to any, nor
Christ said to die for any other, but only those concerning whom all
the properties of it, and acts wherein it doth consist, may be truly
affirmed; which, whether they may be of all men or not, let all men
judge.


CHAPTER VII


Of the nature of the satisfaction of Christ, with arguments from
thence.

Arg. XIII. A third way whereby the death of Christ for sinners is
expressed is SATISFACTION, --namely, that by his death he made
satisfaction to the justice of God for their sins for whom he died,
that so they might go free. It is true, the word satisfaction is not
found in the Latin or English Bible applied to the death of Christ.
In the New Testament it is not at all, and in the Old but twice,
Num. 35:31, 32; but the thing itself intended by that word is
everywhere ascribed to the death of our Saviour, there being also
other words in the original languages equivalent to that whereby we
express the thing in hand. Now, that Christ did thus make
satisfaction for all them, or rather for their sins, for whom he
died, is (as far as I know) confessed by all that are but outwardly
called after his name, the wretched Socinians excepted, with whom at
this time we have not to do. Let us, then, first see what this
satisfaction is; then how inconsistent it is with universal
redemption.

Satisfaction is a term borrowed from the law, applied properly to
things, thence translated and accommodated unto persons; and it is a
full compensation of the creditor from the debtor. To whom any thing
is due from any man, he is in that regard that man's creditor; and
the other is his debtor, upon whom there is an obligation to pay or
restore what is so due from him, until he be freed by a lawful
breaking of that obligation, by making it null and void; which must
be done by yielding satisfaction to what his creditor can require by
virtue of that obligation: as, if I owe a man a hundred pounds, I am
his debtor, by virtue of the bond wherein I am bound, until some
such thing be done as recompenseth him, and moveth him to cancel the
bond; which is called satisfaction. Hence, from things real, it was
and is translated to things personal. Personal debts are injuries
and faults; which when a man hath committed, he is liable to
punishment. He that is to inflict that punishment or upon whom it
lieth to see that it be done, is, or may be, the creditor; which he
must do, unless satisfaction be made. Now, there may be a twofold
satisfaction:--First, By a solution, or paying the very thing that
is in the obligation, either by the party himself that is bound, or
by some other in his stead: as, if I owe a man twenty pounds, and my
friend goeth and payeth it, my creditor is fully satisfied.
Secondly, By a solution, or paying of so much, although in another
kind, not the same that is in the obligation, which, by the
creditor's acceptation, stands in the lieu of it; upon which, also,
freedom from the obligation followeth, not necessarily, but by
virtue of an act of favour.

In the business in hand,--First, the debtor is man; he oweth the ten
thousand talents, Matt. 28:24. Secondly, The debt is sin: "Forgive
us our debts," Matt. 6:12. Thirdly, That which is required in lieu
thereof to make satisfaction for it, is death: "In the day that thou
eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die," Gen. 2:17; "The wages of sin
is death," Rom. 6:23. Fourthly, The obligation whereby the debtor is
tied and bound is the law, "Cursed is every one," etc., Gal. 3:10;
Deut. 27:26; the justice of God, Rom. 1:32; and the truth of God,
Gen. 3:3. Fifthly, The creditor that requireth this of us is God,
considered as the party offended, severe Judge, and supreme Lord of
all things. Sixthly, That which interveneth to the destruction of
the obligation is the ransom paid by Christ: Rom. 3:25, "God set him
forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood."

I shall not enter upon any long discourse of the satisfaction made
by Christ, but only so far clear it as is necessary to give light to
the matter in hand. To this end two things must be cleared:--First,
That Christ did make such satisfaction as whereof we treat; as also
wherein it doth consist. Secondly, What is that act of God towards
man, the debtor, which doth and ought to follow the satisfaction
made. For the FIRST, I told you the word itself doth not occur in
this business in the Scripture, but the thing signified by it (being
a compensation made to God by Christ for our debts) most frequently.
For to make satisfaction to God for our sins, it is required only
that he undergo the punishment due to them; for that is the
satisfaction required where sin is the debt. Now, this Christ has
certainly effected; for "his own self bare our sins in his own body
on the tree," I Pet, 2:24; "By his knowledge shall my righteous
servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities," Isa.
53:11. The word (nasa), also, verse 12, arguing a taking of the
punishment of sin from us and translating it to himself, signifieth
as much, yea all that we do by the word satisfaction. So also doth
that of ANAPHERO, used by Peter in the room thereof: for to bear
iniquity, in the Scripture language, is to undergo the punishment
due to it, Lev. 5:1; which we call to make satisfaction for
it;--which is farther illustrated by a declaration how he bare our
sins, even by being "wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for
our iniquities," Isa 53:5; whereunto is added, in the close, that
"the chastisement of our peace was upon him." Every chastisement is
either, for instruction, or, for example, punishment and correction.

The first can have no place in our Saviour; the Son of God had no
need to be taught with such thorns and briers. It must, therefore,
be for punishment and correction, and that for our sins then upon
him; whereby our peace or freedom from punishment was procured.
Moreover, in the New Testament there be divers words and expressions
concerning the death of our Saviour, holding out that thing which by
satisfaction we do intend; as when, first, it is termed PROSPHORA;
Eph. 5:2, gave up himself, an offering and a sacrifice, or sacrifice
of expiation; as appeareth by that type of it with which it is
compared, Heb. 9:13, 14. Of the same force also is the Hebrew word
(ascham), Isa. 53:10; Lev. 7:2. "He made his soul an offering for
sin,"--a piacular sacrifice for the removing of it away; which the
apostle abundantly cleareth, in saying that he was made "sin"
itself, 2 Cor. 5:21, sin being there put for the adjunct of it, or
the punishment due unto it. So also is he termed "propitiation" I
John 2:2. Whereunto answers the Hebrew chitte, used Gen. 31:39, "Ego
illud expiabam," which is to undergo the debt, and to make
compensation for it; which was the office of him who was to be Job's
(ga=92al) "redeemer", chap. 19:25. All which and divers other words,
which in part shall be afterward considered, do declare the very
same thing which we intend by satisfaction; even a taking upon him
the whole punishment due to sin, and in the offering of himself
doing that which God, who was offended, was more delighted and
pleased withal, than he was displeased and offended with all the
sins of all those that he suffered and offered himself for. And
there can be no more complete satisfaction made to any than by doing
that which he is more contented with, than discontented and troubled
with that for which he must be satisfied. God was more pleased with
the obedience, offering and sacrifice of his Son, than displeased
with the sins and rebellions of all the elect. As if a good king
should have a company of his subjects stand out in rebellion against
him, and he were thereby moved to destroy them, because they would
not have him reign over them, and the only son of that king should
put in for their pardon, making a tender to his father of some
excellent conquest by him lately achieved, beseeching him to accept
of it, and be pleased with his poor subjects, so as to receive them
into favour again; or, which is nearer, should offer himself to
undergo that punishment which his justice had allotted for the
rebels, and should accordingly do it;--he should properly make
satisfaction for their offence, and in strict justice they ought to
be pardoned. This was Christ, as that one hircus, sent-away goat,
that bare and carried away all the sins of the people of God, to
fall himself under them, though with assurance to break all the
bonds of death, and to live for ever. Now, whereas I said that there
is a twofold satisfaction, whereby the debtor is freed from the
obligation that is upon him,--the one being solutio ejusdem, payment
of the same thing that was in the obligation; the other, solutio
tantidem, of that which is not the same, nor equivalent unto it, but
only in the gracious acceptation of the creditor,--it is worth our
inquiry which of these it was that our Saviour did perform.

He (Grotius, distinguished in legal science, Owen makes reference
to) who is esteemed by many to have handled this argument with most
exactness, denieth that the payment made by Christ for us (by the
payment of the debt of sin understand, by analogy, the undergoing of
the punishment due unto it) was solutio ejusdem, or of the same
thing directly which was in the obligation: for which he giveth some
reasons; as,--First, Because such a solution, satisfaction, or
payment, is attended with actual freedom from the obligation.
Secondly, Because, where such a solution is made, there is no room
for remission or pardon. "It is true," saith he, "deliverance
followeth upon it; but this deliverance cannot be by way of gracious
pardon, for there needeth not the interceding of any such act of
grace. But now," saith he, "that satisfaction whereby some other
thing is offered than that which was in the obligation may be
admitted or refused, according as the creditor pleaseth; and being
admitted for any, it is by an act of grace; and such was the
satisfaction made by Christ." Now, truly, none of these reasons seem
of so much weight to me as to draw me into that persuasion.
For the first reason rests upon that, for the confirmation of it,
which cannot be granted,--namely, that actual freedom from the
obligation doth not follow the satisfaction made by Christ; for by
death he did deliver us from death, and that actually, so far as
that the elect are said to die and rise with him. He did actually,
or ipso facto, deliver us from the curse, by being made a curse for
us; and the handwriting that was against us, even the whole
obligation, was taken out of the way and nailed to his cross. It is
true, all for whom he did this do not instantly actually apprehend
and perceive it, which is impossible: but yet that hinders not but
that they have all the fruits of his death in actual right, though
not in actual possession, which last they cannot have until at least
it be made known to them. As, if a man pay a ransom for a prisoner
detained in a foreign country, the very day of the payment and
acceptation of it the prisoner hath right to his liberty, although
he cannot enjoy it until such time as tidings of it are brought unto
him, and a warrant produced for his delivery. So that that reason is
nothing but a begging.

Secondly, The satisfaction of Christ, by the payment of the same
thing that was required in the obligation, is no way prejudicial to
that free, gracious condonation of sin so often mentioned. God's
gracious pardoning of sin compriseth the whole dispensation of grace
towards us in Christ, whereof there are two parts:--First, The
laying of our sin on Christ, or making him to be sin for us; which
was merely and purely an act of free grace, which he did for his own
sake. Secondly, The gracious imputation of the righteousness of
Christ to us, or making us the righteousness of God in him; which is
no less of grace and mercy, and that because the very merit of
Christ himself hath its foundation in a free compact and covenant.
However, that remission, grace, and pardon, which is in God for
sinners, is not opposed to Christ's merits, but ours. He pardoneth
all to us; but he spared not his only Son, he bated him not one
farthing. The freedom, then, of pardon hath not its foundation in
any defect of the merit or satisfaction of Christ, but in three
other things:--First, The will of God freely appointing this
satisfaction of Christ, John 3:16; Rom. 5:8; I John 4:9. Secondly,
In a gracious acceptation of that decreed satisfaction in our
steeds; for so many, no more. Thirdly, In a free application of the
death of Christ unto us.

Remission, then, excludes not a full satisfaction by the solution of
the very thing in the obligation, but only the solution or
satisfaction by him to whom pardon and remission are granted. So
that, notwithstanding, any thing said to the contrary, the death of
Christ made satisfaction in the very thing, that was required in the
obligation. He took away the curse, by "being made a curse," Gal.
3:13, He delivered us from sin, being "made sin," 2 Cor. 5:21. He
underwent death that we might be delivered from death. All our debt
was in the curse of the law, which he wholly underwent. Neither do
we read of any relaxation of the punishment in the Scripture, but
only a commutation of the person; which being done, "God condemned
sin in the flesh of his Son," Rom. 8:3, Christ standing in our
stead: and so reparation was made unto God, and satisfaction given
for all the detriment that might accrue to him by the sin and
rebellion of them for whom this satisfaction was made. His justice
was violated, and he "sets forth Christ to be a propitiation" for
our sins, "that he might be just, and the justifier of him which
believeth in Jesus," Rom. 3:25, 26. And never, indeed, was his
justice more clearly demonstrated than in causing "the iniquity of
us all to meet upon him." His law was broken; therefore Christ comes
to be "the end of the law for righteousness," Rom. 10:4. Our offence
and disobedience was to him distasteful; in the obedience of Christ
he took full pleasure, Rom. 5: 17; Matt. 3:16.

Now from all this, thus much (to clear up the nature of the
satisfaction made by Christ) appeareth,--namely, It was a full,
valuable compensation, made to the justice of God, for all the sins
of all those for whom he made satisfaction, by undergoing that same
punishment which, by reason of the obligation that was upon them,
they themselves were bound to undergo. When I say the same, I mean
essentially the same in weight and pressure, though not in all
accidents of duration and the like; for it was impossible that he
should be detained by death. Now, whether this will stand in the
justice of God, that any of these should perish eternally for whom
Jesus Christ made so full, perfect, and complete satisfaction, we
shall presently inquire; and this is the first thing that we are to
consider in this business.

SECONDLY, We must look what act of God it is that is exercised
either towards us or our Saviour in this business. That God in the
whole is the party offended by our sins is by all confessed. It is
his law that is broken, his glory that is impaired, his honour that
is abased by our sin: "If I be a father," saith he, "where is mine
Honour?" Mal. 1 :6. Now, the law of nature and universal right
requireth that the party offended be recompensed in whatsoever he is
injured by the fault of another. Being thus offended, the Lord is to
be considered under a twofold notion:--First, In respect of us, he
is as a creditor, and all we miserable debtors; to him we owe the
"ten thousand talents," Matt. 18:24. And our Saviour hath taught us
to call our sins our "debts," Matt. 6:12; and the payment of this
debt the Lord requireth and exacteth of us. Secondly, In respect of
Christ,--on whom he was pleased to lay the punishment of us all, to
make our iniquity to meet upon him, not sparing him, but requiring
the debt at his hands to the utmost fartliing,--God is considered as
the supreme Lord and Governor of all, the only Lawgiver, who alone
had power so far to relax his own law as to have the name of a
surety put into the obligation, which before was not there, and then
to require the whole debt of that surety; for he alone hath power of
life and death, James 4:12. Now, these two acts are eminent in God
in this business:--First, An act of severe justice, as a creditor
exacting the payment of the debt at the hands of the debtor; which,
where sin is the debt, is punishment, as was before declared: the
justice of God being repaired thereby in whatsoever it was before
violated. Secondly, An act of sovereignty or supreme dominion, in
translating the punishment from the principal debtor to the surety
which of his free grace he himself had given and bestowed on the
debtor: "He spared not his own Son, but delivered him up to death
for us all." Hence, let these two things be observed:--

1. That God accepteth of the punishment of Christ as a creditor
accepteth of his due debt, when he spares not the debtor, but
requires the uttermost farthing. It is true of punishment, as
punishment, there is no creditor properly; for, "Delicta puniri
publice interest." But this punishment being considered also as a
price, as it is, I Cor. 6:20, it must be paid to the hands of some
creditor, as this was into the hands of God; whence Christ is said
to come to do God's will, Heb. 10:9, and to satisfy him, as John
6:38. Neither, indeed, do the arguments that some have used to prove
that God, as a creditor, cannot inflict punishment, nor yet by
virtue of supreme dominion, seem to me of any great weight. Divers I
find urged by him whose great skill in the law, and such terms as
there, might well give him sanctuary from such weak examiners as
myself; but he that hath so foully betrayed the truth of God in
other things and corrupted his word, deserves not our assent in any
thing but what by evidence of reason is extorted. Let us, then, see
what there is of that in this which we have now in hand:--

First, then, he tells us that "The right of punishing in the rector
or lawgiver can neither be a right of absolute dominion nor a right
of a creditor; because these things belong to him, and are exercised
for his own sake, who hath them, but the right of punishing is for
the good of community."

Ans. Refer this reason unto God, which is the aim of it, and it will
appear to be of no value; for we deny that there is any thing in him
or done by him primarily for the good of any but himself. His
AUTARKEIA, or self-sufficiency, will not allow that he should do any
thing with an ultimate respect to any thing but himself. And whereas
he saith that the right of punishing is for the good of community,
we answer, that "bonum universi" the good of community, is the glory
of God, and that only. So that these things in him cannot be
distinguished.

Secondly, He addeth, "Punishment is not in and for itself desirable,
but only for community's sake. Now, the right of dominion and the
right of a creditor are things in themselves expetible and
desirable, without the consideration of any public aim."

Ans. First, That the comparison ought not to be between punishment
and the right of dominion, but between the right of punishment and
the right of dominion; the fact of one is not to be compared with
the right of the other.

Secondly, God desireth nothing, neither is there any thing desirable
to him, but only for himself. To suppose a good desirable to God for
its own sake is intolerable.

Thirdly, There be some acts of supreme dominion, in themselves and
for their own sake, as little desirable as any act of punishment; as
the annihilation of an innocent creature, which Grotius will not
deny but that God may do.

Thirdly, He proceedeth, "Any one may, without any wrong, go off from
the right of supreme dominion or creditorship; but the Lord cannot
omit the act of punishment to some sins, as of the impenitent."
Ans. God may, by virtue of his supreme dominion, omit punishment
without any wrong or prejudice to his justice. It is as great a
thing to impute sin where it is not, and to inflict punishment upon
that imputation, as not to impute sin where it is, and to remove or
not to inflict punishment upon that non-imputation. Now, the first
of these God did towards Christ; and, therefore, he may do the
latter.

Secondly, The wrong or injustice of not punishing any sin or sins
doth not arise from any natural obligation, but the consideration of
an affirmative positive act of God's will, whereby he hath purposed
that he will do it.

Fourthly, He adds, "None can be called just for using, his own right
or lordship; but God is called just for punishing or not remitting
sin," Rev. 16:5.

Ans. First, However it be in other causes, yet in this God may
certainly be said to be just in exacting his debt or using, his
dominion, because his own will is the only rule of justice.
Secondly, We do not say punishing, is an act of dominion, but an act
of exacting a due debt; the requiring this of Christ in our stead
supposing the intervention of an act of supreme dominion.

Fifthly, His last reason is, "Because that virtue whereby one goeth
off from his dominion or remitteth his debt, is liberality; but that
virtue whereby a man abstaineth from punishing is clemency: so that
punishment can be no act of exacting a debt or acting a dominion."
Ans. The virtue whereby a man goeth off from the exacting, of that
which is due, universally considered, is not always liberality; for,
as Grotius himself confesseth, a debt may arise and accrue to any by
the injury of his fame, credit, or name, by a lie, slander, or
otherwise. Now, that virtue whereby a man is moved not to exact
payment by way of reparation, is not in this case liberality, but
either clemency, or that grace of the gospel for which moralists
have no name; and so it is with every party offended, so often as he
hath a right of requiring punishment from his offender, which yet he
doth not. So that, notwithstanding these exceptions, this is
eminently seen in this business of satisfaction,--that God, as a
creditor, doth exactly require the payment of the debt by the way of
punishment.

2. The second thing eminent in it is, an act of supreme sovereignty
and dominion, requiring the punishment of Christ, for the full,
complete answering of the obligation and fulfilling of the law, Rom.
8:3, 10:4.

Now, these things being thus at large unfolded, we may see, in
brief, some natural consequences following and attending them as
they are laid down; as,--First, That the full and due debt of all
those for whom Jesus Christ was responsible was fully paid in to
God, accordance to the utmost extent of the obligation. Secondly,
That the Lord, who is a just creditor, ought in all equity to cancel
the bond, to surcease all suits, actions, and molestations against
the debtors, full payment being made unto him for the debt. Thirdly,
That the debt thus paid was not this or that sin, but all the sins
of all those for whom and in whose name this payment was made, I
John 1:7, as was before demonstrated. Fourthly, That a second
payment of a debt once paid, or a requiring of it, is not answerable
to the justice which God demonstrated in setting forth Christ to be
a propitiation for our sins, Rom. 3:25. Fifthly, That whereas to
receive a discharge from farther trouble is equitably due to a
debtor who hath been in obligation, his debt being paid, the Lord,
having accepted of the payment from Christ in the stead of all them
for whom he died, ought in justice, according to that obligation
which, in free grace, he hath put upon himself, to grant them a
discharge. Sixthly, That considering that relaxation of the law
which, by the supreme power of the lawgiver, was effected, as to the
persons suffering the punishment required, such actual satisfaction
is made thereto, that it can lay no more to their charge for whom
Christ died than if they had really fulfilled, in the way of
obedience, whatsoever it did require, Rom. 8:32-34.

Now, how consistent these things (in themselves evident, and clearly
following the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction, before declared)
are with universal redemption is easily discernible; for,--First, If
the full debt of all be paid to the utmost extent of the obligation,
how comes it to pass that so many are shut up in prison to eternity,
never freed from their debts? Secondly, If the Lord, as a just
creditor, ought to cancel all obligations and surcease all suits
against such as have their debts so paid, whence is it that his
wrath smokes against some to all eternity? Let none tell me that it
is because they walk not worthy of the benefit bestowed; for that
not walking worthy is part of the debt which is fully paid, for (as
it is in the third inference) the debt so paid is all our sins.

Thirdly, Is it probable that God calls any to a second payment, and
requires satisfaction of them for whom, by his own acknowledgment,
Christ hath made that which is full and sufficient? Hath he an
after-reckoning that he thought not of? for, for what was before him
he spared him not, Rom. 8:32. Fourthly, How comes it that God never
gives a discharge to innumerable souls, though their debts be paid?
Fifthly, Whence, is it that any one soul lives and dies under the
condemning power of the law, never released, if that be fully
satisfied in his behalf, so as it had been all one as if he had done
whatsoever it could require? Let them that can, reconcile these
things I am no CEdipus for them. The poor beggarly distinctions
whereby it is attempted. I have already discussed. And so much for
satisfaction.


CHAPTER VIII


A digression, containing the substance of an occasional conference
concerning the satisfaction of Christ.

Much about the time that I was composing that part of the last
argument which is taken from the satisfaction of Christ, there came
one (whose name, and all things else concerning him, for the respect
I bear to his parts and modesty, shall be concealed) to the place
where I live, and, in a private exercise about the sufferings of
Christ, seemed to those that heard him to enervate, yea overthrow,
the satisfaction of Christ: which I apprehending to be of dangerous
consequence, to prevent a further inconvenience, set myself briefly
and plainly to oppose; and also, a little after, willingly
entertained a conference and debate (desired by the gentleman) about
the point in question: which being carried along with that quietness
and sobriety of spirit which beseemed lovers of and searchers after
truth, I easily perceived not only what was his persuasion in the
thing in hand, but also what was the ground and sole cause of his
misapprehension; and it was briefly this:--That the eternal,
unchangeable love of God to his elect did actually instate them in
such a condition as wherein they were in an incapacity of having any
satisfaction made for them: the end of that being to remove the
wrath due unto them, and to make an atonement for their sins; which,
by reason of the former love of God, they stood in no need of, but
only wanted a clear manifestation of that love unto their souls,
whereby they might be delivered from all that dread, darkness,
guilt, and fear, which was in and upon their consciences, by reason
of a not-understanding of this love, which came upon them through
the fall of Adam. Now, to remove this, Jesus Christ was sent to
manifest this love, and declare this eternal goodwill of God towards
them, so bearing, and taking, away their sins, by removing from
their consciences that misapprehension of God and their own
condition which, by reason of sin, they had before, and not to make
any satisfaction to the justice of God for their sins, he being
eternally well-pleased with them. The sum is, election is asserted
to the overthrow of redemption. What followed in our conference,
with what success by God's blessing it did obtain, shall, for my
part, rest in the minds and judgments of those that heard it, for
whose sake alone it was intended. The things themselves being,
first, of great weight and importance, of singular concernment to
all Christians; secondly, containing in them a mixture of undoubted
truth and no less undoubted errors, true propositions and false
inferences, assertions of necessary verities to the exclusion of
others no less necessary; and, thirdly, directly belonging to the
business in hand,--I shall briefly declare and confirm the whole
truth in this business, so far as occasion was given by the exercise
and debate before mentioned, begining with the first part of it,
concerning, the eternal love of God to his elect, with the state and
condition they are placed in thereby: concerning which you may
observe,--

First, That which is now by some made to be a new doctrine of free
Grace is indeed an old objection against it. That a non-necessity of
satisfaction by Christ, as a consequent of eternal election, was
more than once, for the substance of it, objected to Austin by the
old Pelagian heretics, upon his clearing and vindicating, that
doctrine, is most apparent. The same objection, renewed by others,
is also answered by Calvin, Institut. lib. 2, cap. 16; as also
divers schoolmen had before, in their way, proposed it to
themselves, as Thom. 3. g. 49, a. 4. Yet, notwithstanding the
apparent senselessness of the thing itself, together with the many
solid answers whereby it was long before removed, the Arminians, at
the Synod of Dort, greedily ed it up again, and placed it in the
very front of their arguments against the effectual redemption of
the elect by Jesus Christ. Now, that which was in them only an
objection is taken up by some amongst us as a truth, the absurd
inconsequent consequence of it owned as just and good, and the
conclusion deemed necessary, from the granting of election to the
denial of satisfaction.

Secondly, Observe that there is the same reason of election and
reprobation (in things so opposed, so it must be): "Jacob have I
loved, but Esau have I hated," Rom. 9:13. By the one, men are
"ordained to eternal life," Acts 23:48; by the other, "before of old
ordained unto condemnation," Jude 4. Now if the elect are justified,
and sanctified, and saved, because of God's decree that so they
shall be, whereby they need nothing but the manifestation thereof,
then likewise are the reprobates, as soon as they are finally
impenitent, damned, burned, and want nothing but a manifestation
thereof; which, whether it be true or no, consult the whole
dispensation of God towards them.

Thirdly, Consider what is the eternal love of God. Is it an
affection in his eternal nature, as love is in ours? It were no less
than blasphemy once so to conceive. His pure and holy nature,
wherein there is neither change nor shadow of turning, is not
subject to any such passion; it must be, then, an eternal act of his
will, and that alone. In the Scripture it is called, his "good
pleasure," Matt, 11:26; his "purpose according to election," Rom.
9:11; the "foundation of God," 2 Tim. 2:19. Now, every eternal act
of God's will is immanent in himself, not really distinguished from
himself; whatever is so in God is God. Hence, it puts nothing into
the creature concerning whom it is, nor alteration of its condition
at all; producing, indeed, no effect until some external act of
God's power do make it out. For instance: God decreed from eternity
that he would make the world, yet we know the world was not made
until about five thousand five hundred years ago. But ye will say,
"It was made in God's purpose." That is, say I, he purposed to make
it. So he purposeth there shall be a day of judgment; is there
therefore actually a universal day of judgment already? God
purposeth that he will, in and through Christ, justify and save such
and such certain persons; are they therefore justified because God
purposeth it? It is true, they shall be so, because he hath purposed
it; but that they are so is denied. The consequence is good from the
divine purpose to the futurition of any thing, and the certainty of
its event, not to its actual existence. As when the Lord, in the
beginning ,went actually to make the world, there was no world; so
when he comes to bestow faith and actually to justify a man, until
he hath so done he is not justified. The sum is,--

First, The eternal love of God towards his elect is nothing but his
purpose, good pleasure, a pure act of his will, whereby he
determines to do such and such things for them in his own time and
way. Secondly, No purpose of God, no immanent eternal act of his
will, doth produce any outward effect, or change any thing in nature
and condition of that thing concerning which his purpose is; but
only makes the event and success necessary in respect of that
purpose. Thirdly, The wrath and anger of God that sinners lie under
is not any passion in God, but only the outward effects of anger, as
guilt, bondage, etc. Fourthly, An act of God's eternal love, which
is immanent in himself, doth not exempt the creature from the
condition wherein he is under anger and wrath, until some temporal
act of free grace do really change its state and condition. For
example: God holding the lump of mankind in his own power, as the
clay in the hand of the potter, determining to make some vessels
unto honour, for the praise of his glorious grace, and others to
dishonour, for the manifestation of his revenging justice, and to
this end suffer them all to fall into sin and the guilt of
condemnation, whereby they became all liable to his wrath and curse;
his purpose to save some of these doth not at all exempt or free
them from the common condition of the rest, in respect of themselves
and the truth of their estate, until some actual thing be
accomplished for the bringing of them nigh unto himself: so that
notwithstanding his eternal purpose, his wrath, in respect of the
effects, abideth on them until that eternal purpose do make out
itself in some distinguishing act of free grace; which may receive
farther manifestation by these ensuing arguments:--

1. If the sinner want nothing to acceptation and peace but a
manifestation of God's eternal love, then evangelical justification
is nothing but an apprehension of God's eternal decree and purpose.
But this cannot be made out from the Scripture,--namely, that God's
justifying of a person is his making known unto him his decree of
election; or (that] man's justification [is] an apprehension of that
decree, purpose, or love. Where is any such thing in the book of
God? It is true, there is a discovery thereof made to justified
believers, and therefore it is attainable by the saints, "God
shedding abroad his love in their hearts by the Holy Ghost which is
given unto them," Rom. 5:5; but it is after they are "justified by
faith," and have "peace with God," verse 1. Believers are to give
"all diligence to make their calling and election sure;" but that
justification should consist herein is a strange notion.

Justification, in the Scripture, is an act of God, pronouncing an
ungodly person, upon his believing, to be absolved from the guilt of
sin, and interested in the all-sufficient righteousness of Christ:
so God "justifieth the ungodly," Rom. 4:5, "by the righteousness of
God which is by the faith of Jesus Christ unto them," chap. 3:22;
making Christ to become righteousness to them who were in themselves
sin. But of this manifestation of eternal love there is not the
least foundation, as to be the form of justification; which yet is
not without sense and perception of the love of God, in the
improvement thereof.

2. The Scripture is exceeding clear in making all men, before actual
reconciliation, to be in the like state and condition, without any
real difference at all, the Lord reserving to himself his
distinguishing purpose of the alteration he will afterward by his
free grace effect: "There is none that doeth good, no, not one,"
Rom. 3:12; for "we have proved both Jews and Gentiles that they are
all under sin," verse 9. All mankind are in the same condition, in
respect of themselves and their own real state: which truth is not
at all prejudiced by the relation they are in to the eternal
decrees; for "every mouth is stopped, and all the world is become
guilty before God," Rom. 3:19,--HUPODIKOS, obnoxious to his judgment
"Who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that
thou didst not receive?" ICor. 4:7. All distinguishment, in respect
of state and condition, is by God's actual grace; for even believers
are "by nature children of wrath, even as others," Eph. 2:3. The
condition, then, of all men, during their unregeneracy, is one and
the same, the purpose of God concerning the difference that shall be
being referred to himself. Now, I ask whether reprobates in that
condition lie under the effects of God's wrath, or no? If ye say
"No," who will believe you? If so, why not the elect also? The same
condition hath the same qualifications an actual distinguishment we
have proved there is not. Produce some difference that hath a real
existence, or the cause is lost.

3. Consider what it is to lie under the effects of God's wrath,
according to the declaration of the Scripture, and then see how the
elect are delivered therefrom, before their actual calling. Now,
this consists in divers things; as,--(1.) To be in such a state of
alienation from God as that none of their services are acceptable to
him: "The prayer of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD," Prov.
28:9. (2.) To have no outward enjoyment sanctified, but to have all
things unclean unto them, Tit. 1:15. (3.) To be under the power of
Satan who rules at his pleasure in the children of disobedience,
Eph. 2:2. (4.) To be in unto death, Heb. 2:15. (5.) To be under the
curse and condemning power of the law, Gal. 3:13. (6.) To be
obnoxious to the judgment of God, and to be guilty of eternal death
and damnation, Rom. 3:19. (7.) To be under the power and dominion of
sin, reigning, in them, Rom. 6:19. These and such like are those
which we call the effects of God's anger.

Let now any one tell me what the reprobates, in this life, lie under
more? And do not all the elect, until their actual reconciliation,
in and by Christ, lie under the very same? for,--(1.) Are not their
prayers an abomination to the Lord? can they without faith please
God? Heb. 9:6. And faith we suppose them not to have; for if they
have, they are actually reconciled, (2.) Are their enjoyments
sanctified unto them? hath any thing a sanctified relation without
faith? See I Cor. 7:14. (3.) Are they not under the power of Satan?
If not, how comes Christ, in and for them, to destroy the works of
the devil? Did not he not come to deliver his from him that had the
power of death, that is, the devil? Heb. 2:14; Eph. 2:2, (4.) Are
they not under unto death? The apostle affirms plainly that they are
so all their lives, until they are actually freed by Jesus Christ,
Heb. 2:14,15. (5.) Are they not under the curse of the law? How are
they freed from it? By Christ being made a curse for them, Gal.
3:13. (6.) Are they not obnoxious unto judgment, and guilty of
eternal death? How is it, then, that Paul says that there is no
difference, but that all are subject to the judgment of God, and are
guilty before him? Rom. 3:9; and that Christ saves them from this
wrath, which, in respect of merit, was to come upon them? Rom 5:9; I
Thess. 1:10. (7.) Are they not under the dominion of sin? "God be
thanked," says Paul, "that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have
obeyed," etc., Rom. 6:17. In brief, the Scripture is in nothing more
plentiful than in laying and charging all the misery and wrath of
and due to an unreconciled condition upon the elect of God, until
they actually partake in the deliverance by Christ.

But now some men think to wipe away all that hath been said in a
word, and tell us that all this is so but only in their own
apprehension; not that those things are so indeed and in themselves.
But if these things be so to them only in their apprehension, why
are they otherwise to the rest of the whole world? The Scripture
gives its no difference nor distinction between them. And if it be
so with all, then let all get this apprehension as fast as they can,
and all shall be well with the whole world, now miserably captived
under a misapprehension of their own condition; that is, let them
say the Scripture is a fable, and the terror of the Almighty a
scarecrow to fright children; that sin is only in conceit; and so
square their conversation to their blasphemous fancies. Some men's
words eat as a canker.

4. Of particular places of Scripture, which might abundantly be
produced to our purpose, I shall content myself to name only one:
John 3:36, "He that believeth not the Son, the wrath of God abideth
on him." It abideth: there it was, and there it shall remain, if
unbelief be continued; but upon believing it is removed. "But is not
God's love by which we shall be freed from his wrath?" Who denies
it? But is an apprentice free because he shall be so at the end of
seven years? Because God hath purposed to free his in his own time,
and will do it, are they therefore free before he doth it? "But are
we not in Christ from all eternity?" Yes, chosen in him we are;
therefore, in some sense, in him. But how? Even as we are. Actually,
a man cannot be in Christ until he be. Now, how are we from
eternity? are we eternal? No; only God from eternity hath purposed
that we shall be. Doth this give us an eternal being? Alas! we are
of yesterday; our being in Christ respecteth only the like purpose,
and therefore from thence can be made only the like inference.

This, then, being cleared, it is, I hope, apparent to all how
miserable a strained consequence it is, to argue from God's decree
of election to the overthrow of Christ's merit and satisfaction; the
redemption wrought by Jesus Christ being, indeed, the chief means of
carrying along that purpose unto execution, the pleasure of the Lord
prospering in his hand. Yet, the argument may be retorted, and will
hold undeniable on the other side, the consequence being evident,
from the purpose of God to save sinners, to the satisfaction of
Christ for those sinners. The same act of God's will which sets us
apart from eternity for the enjoyment of all spiritual blessings in
heavenly places, sets also apart Jesus Christ to be the purchaser
and procurer of all those spiritual blessings, as also to make
satisfaction for all their sins; which that he did (being the main
thing opposed) we prove by these ensuing arguments.


CHAPTER IX.


Being a second part of the former digression--Arguments to prove the
satisfaction of Christ.

1. If Christ so took our sins, and had them by God so laid and
imposed on him, as that he underwent the punishment due unto them in
our stead, then he made satisfaction to the justice of God for them,
that the sinners might go free; but Christ so took and bare our
sins, and had them so laid upon him, as that he underwent the
punishment due unto them, and that in our stead: therefore, he made
satisfaction to the justice of God for them. The consequent of the
proposition is apparent, and was before proved. Of the assumption
there be three parts, severally to be confirmed: --First, That
Christ took and bare our sins, God laying them on him. Secondly,
That he so took them as to undergo the punishment due unto them.
Thirdly, That he did this in our stead.

For the first, that he took and bare our sins, ye have it, John
1:29, "Who taketh away the sin of the world;" I Pet. 2:24, "Who his
own self bare our sins in his own body;" Isa. 53:11, "He shall bear
their iniquities;" and verse 12, "He bare the sin of many." That God
also laid or imposed our sins on him is no less apparent: Isa, 53:6,
"The LORD, made to meet on him the iniquity of us all;" 2 Cor. 5:21,
"He hath made him to be sin for us."

The second branch is, that in thus doing our Saviour underwent the
punishment due to the sins which he bare, which were laid upon him;
which may be thus made manifest:--Death and the curse of the law
contain the whole of the punishment due to sin, Gen. 2:17, "Dying
then shalt die," is that which was threatened. Death was that which
entered by sin, Rom. 5:12: which word in these places is
comprehensive of all misery due to our transgressions; which also is
held out in the curse of the law, Deut. 27:26, "Cursed be he that
confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them." That all evils
of punishment whatsoever are comprised in these is unquestionably
evident. Now, Jesus Christ in bearing our sins underwent both these:
for "by the grace of God he tasted death," Heb. 2:9; by death
delivering from death, verse 14. He was not "spared, but given up to
death for us all," Rom. 8:32. So also the curse of the law: Gal.
3:13, he "was made a curse for us;" and "cursed." And this by the
way of undergoing the punishment that was in death and curse: for by
these "it pleased the LORD to bruise him, and put him to grief,"
Isa. 53:IO; yea, "he spared him not," Rom. 8:32, but "condemned sin
in his flesh," verse 3. It remaineth only to show that he did this
in our stead, and the whole argument is confirmed.

Now, this also our Saviour himself maketh apparent, Matt. 20:28. He
came "to give himself a ransom for many." The word ANTI always
supposeth a commutation, and change of one person or thing instead
of another, as shall be afterward declared: so Matt 2:22; so I Tim.
2:6; 1 Pet 3:18, "He suffered for us, the just for the unjust;" and
Ps. 69:4, "I restored" (or paid) "that which I took not
away,"--namely, our debt, so far as that thereby we are discharged,
as Rom. 8:34, where it is asserted, upon this very ground, that he
died in our stead. And so the several parts of this first argument
are confirmed.

II. If Jesus Christ paid into his Father's hands a valuable price
and ransom for our sins, as our surety, so discharging the debt that
we lay under, that we might go free, then did he bear the punishment
due to our sins, and make satisfaction to the justice of God for
them (for to pay such a ransom is to make such satisfaction); but
Jesus Christ paid such a price and ransom, as our surety, into his
Father's hands, etc: ergo,--

There be four things to be proved in the assumption, or second
proposition:--First, That Christ paid such a price and ransom.
Secondly, That he paid it into the hands of his Father. Thirdly,
That he did it as our surety. Fourthly, That we might go free. All
which we shall prove in order:

First, For the first, our Saviour himself affirms it, Matt. 20:28.
He "came to give his life LUTRON," a ransom or price of redemption
"for many," Mark 10:45; which the apostle terms ANTILUTRON, I Tim.
2:6, a ransom to be accepted in the stead of others: whence we are
said to have deliverance, "by the ransom-paying of Christ Jesus,"
Rom. 3:24. "He bought us with a price," 1 Cor. 6:20; which price was
his own blood, Acts 20:28; compared to and exalted above silver and
gold in this work of redemption, I Pet. 1:18. So that this first
part is most clear and evident.

Secondly, He paid this price into the hands of his Father. A price
must be paid to somebody in the case of deliverance from captivity
by it; it must be paid to the judge or jailer,--that is, to God or
the devil. To say the latter were the highest blasphemy; Satan was
to be conquered, not satisfied. For the former, the Scripture is
clear: It was his "wrath" that was on us, John 3:36. It was he that
had "shut us all up under sin," Gal. 3:22. He is the great king to
whom the debt is owing, Matt. 28:23-34. He is the only "law-giver,
who is able to save and to destroy," James 4:12. Nay, the ways
whereby this ransom-paying is in the Scripture expressed abundantly
enforce the payment of it into the hands of his Father; for his
death and blood-shedding is said to be PROSPHORA and THUSIA, "an
oblation and sacrifice," Eph. 5:2; and his soul to be a sacrifice or
"offering for sin," Isa. 53:lO. Now, certainly offerings and
sacrifices are to be directed unto God alone.

Thirdly, That he did this as surety, we are assured, Heb. 7:22. He
was made EGGUOS, a "surety of a better testament;" and, in
performance of the duty which lay upon him as such, "he paid that
which he took not away," Ps. 69:4. All which could not possibly have
any other end but that we might go free.

III. To make an atonement for sin, and to reconcile God unto the
sinners, is in effect to make satisfaction unto the justice of God
for sin, and all that we understand thereby; but Jesus Christ, by
his death and oblation, did make an atonement for sin, and reconcile
God unto sinners: ergo,--

The first proposition is in itself evident; the assumption is
confirmed, Rom. 3:24,25. We are justified freely by the
ransom-paying, that is in Christ, whom God hath set forth to be
HILASTERION, a propitiation, an atonement, a mercy-seat, a covering
of iniquity; and that, for the manifestation of his justice,
declared in the going forth and accomplishment thereof. So likewise
Heb. 2:17, he is said to be a "merciful high priest,"--"to make
reconciliation for the sins of the people," to reconcile God unto
the people: the meaning of the words being,--to reconcile God, who
was offended with the sins of the people; which reconciliation we
are said to "receive," Rom. 5:11 (the word KATALLAGE there, in our
common translation rendered "atonement," is in other places in the
same rendered "reconciliation," being indeed, the only word used for
it in the New Testament.) And all this is said to be
accomplished,--by one righteousness or satisfaction; that is of
Christ, (the words will not bear that sense wherein they are usually
rendered, "By the righteousness of one"). And hereby were we
delivered from that from which it was impossible we should be
otherwise delivered, Rom. 8:3.

IV. That wherein the exercise of the priestly office of Jesus Christ
whilst he was on earth doth consist, cannot be rejected nor denied
without damnable error; but the exercise of the priestly office of
Jesus Christ whilst he was upon the earth consisted in this, to bear
the punishment due to our sins, to make atonement with God, by
undergoing his wrath, and reconciling him to sinners upon the
satisfaction made to his justice: therefore cannot these things be
denied without damnable error.

That in the things before recounted the exercise of Christ's
priestly office did consist is most apparent,--first, From all the
types and sacrifices whereby it was prefigured, their chief end
being propitiation and atonement; secondly, From the very nature of
the sacerdotal office, appointed for sacrificing, Christ having
nothing to offer but his own blood, through the eternal Spirit; and,
thirdly, From divers, yea, innumerable texts of Scripture affirming
the same. It would be too long a work to prosecute these things
severally and at large, and therefore I will content myself with one
or two places wherein all those testimonies are comprised; as Heb.
9:13, 14, "If the blood of bulls and of goats," etc., "how much more
shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered
himself without spot to God?" etc. Here the death of Christ is
compared to, exalted above, and in the antitype answereth, the
sacrifices of expiation which were made by the blood of bulls and
goats; and so must, at least spiritually, effect what they did
carnally accomplish and typically prefigure,--namely, deliverance
from the guilt of sin by expiation and atonement: for as in them the
life and blood of the sacrifice was accepted in the stead of the
offerer, who was to die for the breach of the law, according to the
rigour of it, so in this of Christ was his blood accepted as an
atonement and propitiation for us, himself being priest, altar, and
sacrifice. So, Heb. 10:10-12, he is said expressly, in the room of
all the old, insufficient, carnal sacrifices, which could not make
the comers thereunto perfect, to offer up his own body a sacrifice
for sins, for the remission and pardon of sins through that offering
of himself; as it is verse 19. And in the performance also do we
affirm that our Saviour underwent the wrath of God which was due
unto us. This, because it is by some questioned, I shall briefly
confirm, and that with these following reasons:--

First, The punishment due to sin is the wrath of God: Rom. 1:18,
"The wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness;" chap. 2:5,
"The day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;"
Eph. 2:3, "Children of wrath;" John 3:36. But Jesus Christ underwent
the punishment due to sin: 2 Cor. 5:21, "Made sin for us;" Isa.
53:6, "Iniquity was laid upon him;" I Pet. 2:24, "He bare our sins
in his own body on the tree." Therefore he underwent the wrath of
God.

Secondly, The curse of the law is the wrath of God taken passively,
Deut 24:20, 21. But Jesus Christ underwent the curse of the law:
Gal. 3:13, "Made a curse for us," the curse that they lie under who
are out of Christ, who are "of the works of the law," verse, 10.
Therefore he underwent the wrath of God.

Thirdly, The death that sinners are to undergo is the wrath of God.
Jesus Christ did taste, of that death which sinners for themselves
were to undergo; for he died as "our surety," Heb. 7:22, and in our
stead, Matt. 20:28. Hence his fear, Heb. 5:7; agony, Luke 22:44;
astonishment and amazement, Mark 14:33; dereliction, Matt. 27:46;
sorrow, heaviness, and inexpressible pressures, chap. 26:37-39.
V. That doctrine cannot be true nor agreeable to the gospel which
strikes at the root of gospel faith, and plucks away the foundation
of all that strong consolation which God is so abundantly willing we
should receive; but such is that of denying the satisfaction made by
Christ, his answering the justice and undergoing the wrath of his
Father. It makes the poor soul to be like Noah's dove in its
distress, not knowing where to rest the soles of her feet. When a
soul is turned out of its self-righteousness, and begins to look
abroad, and view the heaven and earth for a resting place, and
perceives an ocean, a flood, an inundation of wrath, to cover all
the world, the wrath of God revealing itself from heaven against all
ungodliness, so that it can obtain no rest nor abiding,--heaven it
cannot reach by its own flight, and to hell it is unwilling to
fall;--if now the Lord Jesus Christ do not appear as an ark in the
midst of the waters, upon whom the floods have fallen, and yet has
got above them all for a refuge, alas! what shall it do? When the
flood fell there were many mountains glorious in the eye, far higher
than the ark; but yet those mountains were all drowned, whilst the
ark still kept on the top of the waters. Many appearing hills and
mountains of self-righteousness and general mercy, at the first
view, seem to the soul much higher than Jesus Christ, but when the
flood of wrath once comes and spreads itself, all those mountains
are quickly covered; only the ark, the Lord Jesus Christ though the
flood fall on him also, yet he gets above it quite, and gives safety
to them that rest upon him.

Let me now ask any of those poor souls who ever have been wandering
and tossed with the fear of the wrath to come, whether ever they
found a resting-place until they came to this: --God spared not his
only Son, but gave him up to death for us all; that he made him to
be sin for us; that he put all the sins of all the elect into that
cup which he was to drink of; that the wrath and flood which they
feared did fall upon Jesus Christ (though now, as the ark, he be
above it, so that if they could get into him they should be safe).
The storm hath been his, and the safety shall be theirs. As all the
waters which would have fallen upon them that were in the ark fell
upon the ark, they being dry and safe, so all the wrath that should
have fallen upon them fell on Christ; which alone causeth their
souls to dwell in safety? Hath not, I say, this been your bottom,
your foundation, your resting-place? If not (for the substance of
it), I fear you have but rotten bottoms. Now, what would you say if
a man should come and pull this ark from under you, and give you an
old rotten post to swim upon in the flood of wrath? It is too late
to tell you no wrath is due unto you; the word of truth and your own
consciences have given you other information. You know the "wages of
sin is death," in whomsoever it be; he must die in whomsoever it is
found. So that truly the soul may well say, "Bereave me of the
satisfaction of Christ, and I am bereaved. If he fulfilled not
justice, I must; if he underwent not wrath, I must to eternity. O
rob me not of my only pearl!" Denying the satisfaction of Christ
destroys the foundation of faith and comfort.

VI. Another argument we may take from some few particular places of
Scripture, which, instead of many, I shall produce:--

As, first, 2 Cor. 5:21, "He made him to be sin for us, who knew no
sin." "He made him to be sin for us;" how could that be? are not the
next words, "He knew no sin?" was he not a Lamb without blemish, and
without spot? Doubtless; "he did no sin, neither was guile found in
his mouth." What then is this, "God made him to be sin?" It cannot
be that God made him sinful, or a sinner by any inherent sin; that
will not stand with the justice of God nor with the holiness of the
person of our Redeemer. What is it, then? "He made him to be sin who
knew no sin?" Why, clearly, by dispensation and consent, he laid
that to his charge whereof he was not guilty. He charged upon him
and imputed unto him all the sins of all the elect, and proceeded
against him accordingly. He stood as our surety, really charged with
the whole debt, and was to pay the utmost farthing, as a surety is
to do if it be required of him; though he borrow not the money, nor
have one penny of that which is in the obligation, yet if he be sued
to an execution, he must pay all. The Lord Christ (if I may so say)
was sued by his Father's justice unto an execution, in answer
whereunto he underwent all that was due to sin; which we proved
before to be death, wrath, and curse.

If it be excepted (as it is) "That God was always well pleased with
his Son,--he testified it again and again from heaven,--how, then,
could he lay his wrath upon him?" Ans. It is true he was always well
pleased with him; yet it "pleased him to bruise him and put him to
grief." He was always well pleased with the holiness of his person,
the excellency and perfectness of his righteousness, and the
sweetness of his obedience, but he was displeased with the sins that
were charged on him: and therefore it pleased him to bruise and put
him to grief with whom he was always well pleased.

Nor is that other exception of any more value, "That Christ
underwent no more than the elect lay under; but they lay not under
wrath and the punishment due to sin." Ans. The proposition is most
false, neither is there any more truth in the assumption;
for--First, Christ underwent not only that wrath (taking it
passively) which the elect were under, but that also which they
should have undergone bad not he borne it for them: he "delivered
them from the wrath to come," Secondly, The elect do, in their
several generations, lie under all the wrath of God in respect of
merit and procurement, though not in respect of actual
endurance,--in respect of guilt, not present punishment, So that,
notwithstanding there exceptions, it stands firm that "he was made
sin for us, who knew no sin."

Isa. 53:5, "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised
for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and
with his stripes we are healed." Of this place something was said
before; I shall add some small enlargements that conduce to discover
the meaning of the words. "The chastisement of our peace was upon
him;" that is, he was chastised or punished that we might have
peace, that we might go free, our sins being the cause of his
wounding, and our iniquities of his being bruised, all our sins
meeting upon him, as verse 6; that is, he "bare our sins," in
Peter's interpretation. He bare our sins (not, as some think, by
declaring that we were never truly sinful, but) by being wounded for
them, bruised for them, undergoing the chastisement due unto them,
consisting in death, wrath, and curse, so making his soul an
offering for sin. "He bare our sins;" that is, say some, he declared
that we have an eternal righteousness in God, because of his eternal
purpose to do us good. But is this to interpret Scripture, or to
corrupt the word of God? Ask the word what it means by Christ's
bearing of sin; it will tell you, his being "stricken" for our
transgressions, Isa. 53:8,--his being "cut off" for our sins, Dan.
9: 26. Neither hath the expression of bearing sins any other
signification in the word: Lev. 5:1, "If a soul hear the voice of
swearing, if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity."
What is that? he shall declare himself or others to be free from
sin? No, doubtless; but, he shall undergo the punishment due to sin,
as our Saviour did in bearing our iniquities. He must be a cunning
gamester indeed that shall cheat a believer of this foundation.
More arguments or texts on this subject I shall not urge or produce,
though the cause itself will enforce the most unskilful to abound. I
have proceeded as far as the nature of a digression will well bear.
Neither shall I undertake, at this time, the answering of objections
to the contrary; a full discussion of the whole business of the
satisfaction of Christ, which should cause me to search for, draw
forth, and confute all objections to the contrary, being not by me
intended. And for those which were made it that debate which gave
occasion to this discourse, I dare not produce them, lest haply I
should not be able to restrain the conjectures of men that I
purposely framed such weak objections, that 1 might obtain an easy
conquest over a man of straw of mine own erection, so weak were they
and of so little force to the slashing of so fundamental a truth as
that is which we do maintain. So of this argument hitherto.


CHAPTER X.


Of the merit of Christ, with arguments from thence.

ARG. XIV. A fourth thing ascribed to the death of Christ is MERIT,
or that worth and value of his death whereby he purchased and
procured unto us, and for us, all those good things which we find in
the Scripture for his death to be bestowed upon us. Of this, much I
shall not speak, having considered the thing itself under the notion
of impetration already; only, I shall add some few observations
proper to that particular of the controversy which we have in hand.
The word merit is not at all to be found in the New Testament, in no
translation out of the original that I have seen. The vulgar Latin
once reads promeretur, Heb. 13:16; and the Rheimists, to preserve
the sound, have rendered it promerited. But these words in both
languages are uncouth and barbarous, besides that they no way answer
EUARESTEO, the word in the original, which gives no colour to merit,
name or thing. Nay, I suppose it will prove a difficult thing to
find out any one word, in either of the languages wherein the holy
Scripture was written, that doth properly and immediately, in its
first native importance, signify merit. So that about the name we
shall not trouble ourselves, if the thing itself intended thereby be
made apparent, which it is both in the Old and New Testament; as
Isa. 53:5, "The chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his
stripes we are healed." The procurement of our peace and heaing, was
the merit of his chastisement and stripes. So Heb. 9:12, "Obtaining
by his blood eternal redemption," is as much as we intend to signify
by the merit of Christ. The word which comes nearest it in
signification we have, Acts 20:28, PERIPOIEO, "Purchased with his
own blood;" purchase and impetration, merit and acquisition, being
in this business terms equivalent; which latter word is used in
divers other places, as I Thess. 5:9; Eph. 1:14; I Pet 2:9. Now,
that which by this name we understand is, the performance of such an
action as whereby the thing aimed at by the agent is due unto him,
according to the equity and equality required in justice; as, "To
him that worketh, is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt,"
Rom. 4:4. That there is such a merit attending the death of Christ
is apparent from what was said before; neither is the weight of any
operose proving [of] it imposed on us, by our adversaries seeming to
acknowledge it no less themselves; so that we may take it for
granted (until our adversaries close with the Socinians in this
also).

Christ then, by his death, did merit and purchase, for all those for
whom he died, all those things which in the Scripture are assigned
to be the fruits and effects of his death. These are the things
purchased and merited by his blood-shedding, and death; which may be
referred unto two heads:--First, Such as are privative; as,--I.
Deliverence from the hand of our enemies, Luke 1:74; from the wrath
to come, I Thess. 1:10. 2. The destruction and abolition of death in
his power, Heb. 2:14; 3. Of the works of the devil, I John 3:8. 4.
Deliverence from the curse of the law, Gal. 3:13; 5. From our vain
conversation, I Pe1:18; 6. From the present evil world, Gal. 1:4; 7.
From the earth, and from among men, Rev. 14:3,4. 8. Purging of our
sins, Heb. 1:3, Secondly, Positive; as,--1. Reconciliation with God,
Rom. 5:10; Eph. 2:16; Col. 1:20. 2. Appeasing or atoning of God by
propitiation, Rom. 3:25; I John 2:2. 3. Peacemaking, Eph. 2:14. 4.
Salvation, Matt. 1:21. All these hath our Saviour by his death
merited and purchased for all them for whom he died; that is, so
procured them of his Father that they ought, in respect of that
merit, according to the equity of justice, to be bestowed on them
for whom they were so purchased and procured. It was absolutely of
free grace in God that he would send Jesus Christ to die for any; it
was of free grace for whom he would send him to die; it is of free
grace that the good things procured by his death be bestowed on any
person, in respect of those persons on whom they are bestowed: but
considering his own appointment and constitution, that Jesus Christ
by his death should merit and procure grace and glory for those for
whom he died, it is of debt in respect of Christ that they be
communicated to them. Now, that which is thus merited, which is of
debt to be bestowed, we do not say that it may be bestowed, but it
ought so to be, and it is injustice if it be not.

Having said this little of the nature of merit, and of the merit of
Christ, the procurement of his death for them in whose stead he
died, it will quickly be apparent how irreconcilable the general
ransom is therewith ; for the demonstration whereof we need no more
but the proposing of this one question,--namely, If Christ hath
merited grace and glory for all those for whom he died, if he died
for all, how comes it to pass that these things are not communicated
to and bestowed upon all? Is the defect in the merit of Christ, or
in the justice of God? How vain it is to except, that these things
are not bestowed absolutely upon us, but upon condition, and
therefore were so procured; seeing, that the very condition itself
is also merited and procured, as Eph. 1:3, 4, Phil. 1:29,--hath been
already declared.

ARG. XV. Fifthly, The very phrases of "DYING FOR US," "bearing our
sins," being our "surety," and the like, whereby the death of Christ
for us is expressed, will not stand with the payment of a ransom for
all. To die for another is, in Scripture, to die in that other's
stead, that he might go free; as Judah besought his brother Joseph
to accept of him for a bondman instead of Benjamin, that he might be
set at liberty, Gen. 44:33, and that to make good the engagement
wherein he stood bound to his father to be a surety for him. He that
is surety for another (as Christ was for us, Heb. 7:22), is to
undergo the danger, that the other may be delivered. So David,
wishing that he had died for his son Absalom, 2 Sam. 18:33,
intended, doubtless, a commutation with him, and a substitution of
his life for his, so that he might have lived. Paul also, Rom. 5:7,
intimates the same, supposing that such a thing might be found among
men that one should die for another; no doubt alluding to the Decii,
Menoeceus, Euryalus, and such others, whom we find mentioned in the
stories of the heathen, who voluntarily cast themselves into death
for the deliverance of their country or friends, continuing their
liberty and freedom from death who were to undergo it, by taking it
upon themselves, to whom it was not directly due. And this plainly
is the meaning of that phrase, "Christ died for us;" that is, in the
undergoing of death there was a subrogation of his person in the
room and stead of ours. Some, indeed, except that where the word
[HUPER, for] is used in this phrase, as Heb. 2:9, "That he by the
grace of God should taste death for every man," there only the good
and profit of them for whom he died is intended, not enforcing the
necessity of any commutation. But why this exception should prevail
I see no reason, for the same preposition being used in the like
kind in other cases doth confessedly intimate a commutation; as Rom.
9:3, where Paul affirms that he "could wish himself accursed from
Christ,"--"for his brethren,"--that is, in their stead, that they
might be united to him. So also, 2 Cor. 5:20, "We are ambassadors in
Christ's stead." So the same apostle, I Cor. 1:13, asking, and
strongly denying by way of interrogation; "Was Paul crucified for
you?" plainly showeth that the word HUPER, used about the crucifying
of Christ for his church, doth argue a commutation or change, and
not only designs the good of them for whom he died, for, plainly, he
might himself have been crucified for the good of the church; but in
the stead thereof, he abhorreth the least thought of it. But
concerning the word ANTI, which also is used, there is no doubt, nor
can any exception be made; it always signifieth a commutation and
change, whether it be applied to things or persons: so Luke 11:11,
"A serpent instead of a fish;" so Matt. 5:38, "An eye for an eye;"
so Heb. 12:16 --and for persons, Archelaus is said to reign,
"instead of his father," Matt. 2:22. Now, this word is used of the
death of our Saviour, Matt. 20:28, "The Son of man came to give his
life a ransom for many,"--which words are repeated again, Mark
10:45,-that is, to give his life a ransom in the stead of the lives
of many. So that, plainly, Christ dying for us, as a surety, Heb.
7:22, and thereby and therein "bearing our sins in his own body," I
Pet. 2:24, being made a curse for us, was an undergoing of death,
punishment, curse, wrath, not only for our good, but directly in our
stead; a commutation and subrogation of his person in the room and
place of ours being allowed, and of God accepted. This being,
cleared, I demand,--First, Whether Christ died thus for all? that
is, whether he died in the room and stead of all, so that his person
was substituted in the room of theirs? as, whether he died in the
stead of Cain and Pharaoh, and the rest, who long before his death
were under the power of the second death, never to be delivered?
Secondly, Whether it be justice that those, or any of them, in whose
stead Christ died, bearing their iniquities, should themselves also
die and bear their own sins to eternity? Thirdly, What rule of
equity is there, or example for it, that when the surety hath
answered and made satisfaction to the utmost of what was required in
the obligation wherein he was a surety, they for whom he was a
surety should afterwards be proceeded against? Fourthly, Whether
Christ hung upon the cross in the room or stead of reprobates?

Fifthly, Whether he underwent all that which was due unto them for
whom he died? If not, how could he be said to die in their stead? If
so, why are they not all delivered? I shall add no more but this,
that to affirm Christ to die for all men is the readiest way to
prove that he died for no man, in the sense Christians have hitherto
believed, and to hurry poor souls into the bottom of Socinian
blasphemies.


CHAPTER XI.


The last general argument.

ARG, XVI. Our next argument is taken from some particular places of
Scripture, clearly and distinctly in themselves holding out the
truth of what we do affirm. Out of the great number of them I shall
take a few to insist upon, and therewith to close our arguments.

1. The first that I shall begin withal is the first mentioning of
Jesus Christ, and the first revelation of the mind of God concerning
a discrimination between the people of Christ and his enemies: Gen.
3:15, "I will put enmity between thee" (the serpent) "and the woman,
and between thy seed and her seed," By the seed of the woman is
meant the whole body of the elect, Christ in the first place as the
head, and all the rest as his members; by the seed of the serpent,
the devil, with all the whole multitude of reprobates, making up the
malignant state, in opposition to the kingdom and body of Jesus
Christ.

That by the first part, or the seed of the woman, is meant Christ
with all the elect, is most apparent; for they in whom an the things
that are here foretold of the seed of the woman do concur, are the
seed of the woman (for the properties of any thing do prove the
thing itself.) But now in the elect, believers in and through
Christ, are to be found all the properties of the seed of the woman;
for, for them, in them, and by them, is the head of the serpent
broken, and Satan trodden down under their feet, and the devil
disappointed in his temptations, and the devil's agents frustrated
in their undertakings. Principally and especially, this is spoken of
Christ himself, collectively of his whole body, which beareth a
continual hatred to the serpent and his seed.

Secondly, By the seed of the serpent is meant all the reprobate, men
of the world, impenitent, unbelievers. For,

First, The enmity of the serpent lives and exerciseth itself in
them. They hate and oppose the seed of the woman; they have a
perpetual enmity with it; and every thing that is said of the seed
of the serpent belongs properly to them.

Secondly, They are often so called in the Scripture: Matt. 3:7, "O
generation of vipers," or seed of the serpent; so also chap. 23:33.

So Christ telleth the reprobate Pharisees, "Ye are of your father
the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do," John 8:44. So
again, "Child of the devil," Acts 13:10,--that is, the seed of the
serpent; for "he that committeth sin is of the devil," I John 3:8.
These things being undeniable, we thus proceed:--Christ died for no
more than God promised unto him that be should die for. But God did
not promise him to all, as that he should die for them; for he did
not promise the seed of the woman to the seed of the serpent, Christ
to reprobates, but in the first word of him he promiseth an enmity
against them. In sum, the seed of the woman died not for the seed of
the serpent.

2. Matt. 7:23, "I will profess unto them, I never knew you" Christ
at the last day professeth to some he never knew them. Christ saith
directly that he knoweth his own, whom he layeth down his life for,
John 10:14-17. And surely he knows whom and what he hath bought.
Were it not strange that Christ should die for them, and buy them
that he will not own, but profess he never knew them? If they are
"bought with a price," surely they are his own? I Cor. 6:20. If
Christ did so buy them, and lay out the price of his precious blood
for them, and then at last deny that he ever knew them, might they
not well reply, "Ah, Lord! was not thy soul heavy unto death for our
sakes? Didst thou not for us undergo that wrath that made thee sweat
drops of blood? Didst thou not bathe thyself in thine own blood,
that our blood might be spared? Didst thou not sanctify thyself to
be an offering for us as well as for any of thy apostles? Was not
thy precious blood, by stripes, by sweat, by nails, by thorns, by
spear, poured out for us? Didst thou not remember us when thou
hungest upon the cross? And now dost thou say, thou never knewest
us? Good Lord, though we be unworthy sinners, yet thine own blood
hath not deserved to be despised. Why is it that none can lay any
thing to the charge of God's elect? Is it not because thou diets for
them? And didst thou not do the same for us? Why, then, are we thus
charged, thus rejected? Could not thy blood satisfy thy Father, but
we ourselves must be punished? Could not justice content itself with
that sacrifice, but we must now hear, "Depart, I never knew
you?" What can be answered to this plea, upon the granting of the
general ransom, I know not.

3. Matt. 11:25, 26, "I thank thee, 0 Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent,
and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father: for so it seemed
good in thy sight." Those men from whom God in his sovereignty, as
Lord of heaven and earth, of his own good pleasure, hideth the
gospel, either in respect of the outward preaching of it, or the
inward revelation of the power of it in their hearts, those
certainly Christ died not for; for to what end should the Father
send his only Son to die for the redemption of those whom he, for
his own good pleasure, had determined should be everlasting
strangers from it, and never so much as hear of it in the power
thereof revealed to them? Now, that such there are our Saviour here
affirms; and he thanks his Father for that dispensation at which so
many do at this day repine.

4. John 10:11, 15, 16, 27, 28. This clear place, which of itself is
sufficient to evert the general ransom, hath been a little
considered before, and, therefore, I shall pass it over the more
briefly. First, That all men are not the sheep of Christ is most
apparent; for,--First, He himself saith so, verse 26, "Ye are not of
my sheep." Secondly, The distinction at the last day will make it
evident, when the sheep and the goats shall be separated. Thirdly,
The properties of the sheep are, that they hear the voice of Christ,
that they know him; and the like are not in all. Secondly, That the
sheep here mentioned are all his elect, as well those that were to
be called as those that were then already called. Verse 16, Some
were not as yet of his fold of called ones; so that they are sheep
by election, and not believing. Thirdly, That Christ so says that he
laid down his life for his sheep, that plainly he excludes all
others; for,--First, He lays down his life for them as sheep. Now,
that which belongs to them as such belong only to such. If he lays
down his life for sheep, as sheep, certainly be doth it not for
goats, and wolves, and dogs. Secondly, He lays down his life as a
shepherd, verse 11; therefore, for them as the sheep. What hath the
shepherd to do with the wolves, unless it be to destroy them?
Thirdly, Dividing all into sheep and others, verse 26, he saith he
lays down his life for his sheep; which is all one as if he had said
he did it for them only. Fourthly, He describes them for whom he
died by this, "My Father gave them me," verse 29; as also chap.
17:6, "Thine they were, and thou gavest them me:" which are not all;
for "all that the Father giveth him shall come to him," chap. 6:37,
and he "giveth unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish,"
chap. 10:28. Let but the sheep of Christ keep close to this
evidence, and all the world shall never deprive them of their
inheritance. Farther to confirm this place, add Matt. 20:28; John
11:52.

5. Rom. 8:32-34. The intention of the apostle in this place is, to
hold out consolation to believers in affliction or under any
distress; which he doth, verse 31, in general, from the assurance of
the presence of God with them, and his assistance at all times,
enough to conquer all oppositions, and to make all difficulty indeed
contemptible, by the assurance of his loving kindness, which is
better than life itself. "If God be for us, who can be against us?"
To manifest this his presence and kindness, the apostle minds them
of that most excellent, transcendent, and singular act of love
towards them, in sending his Son to die for them, not sparing him,
but requiring their debt at his hand; whereupon he argues from the
greater to the less,-- that if he have done that for us, surely he
will do every thing else that shall be requisite. If he did the
greater, will he not do the less? If he give his Son to death, will
he not also freely give us all things? Whence we may
observe,--First, That the greatest and most eximious expression of
the love of God towards believers is in sending his Son to die for
them, not sparing him for their sake; this is made the chief of all.
Now, if God sent his Son to die for all, he had [done] as great an
act of love, and hath made as great a manifestation of it, to them
that perish as to those that are saved. Secondly, That for
whomsoever he hath given and not spared his Son, unto them he will
assuredly freely give all things; but now he doth not give all
things that are good for them unto all, as faith, grace, and glory:
from whence we conclude that Christ died not for all. Again, verse
33, he gives us a description of those that have a share in the
consolation here intended, for whom God gave his Son, to whom he
freely gives all things; and that is, that they are his
"elect,"--not all, but only those whom he hath chosen before the
foundation of the world, that they should be holy; which gives
another confirmation of the restraint of the death of Christ to them
alone: which he yet farther confirms, verse 34, by declaring that
those of whom he speaks shall be freely justified and freed from
condemnation; whereof he gives two reasons,--first, Because Christ
died for them; secondly, Because he is risen, and makes intercession
for them for whom he died: affording us two invincible arguments to
the business in hand. The first, taken from the infallible effects
of the death of Christ: Who shall lay any thing to their charge? who
shall condemn them? Why, what reason is given? "It is Christ that
died." So that his death doth infallibly free all them from
condemnation for whom he died. The second, from the connection that
the apostle here makes between the death and intercession of Jesus
Christ: For whom he died, for them he makes intercession; but he
saveth to the utmost them for whom he intercedeth, Heb. 7:25, From
all which it is undeniably apparent that the death of Christ, with
the fruits and benefits thereof, belongeth only to the elect of God.

6. Eph. 1:7, "In whom we have redemption." If his blood was shed for
all, then all must have a share in those things that are to be had
in his blood. Now, amongst these is that redemption that consists in
the forgiveness of sins; which certainly all have not, for they that
have are "blessed," Ro4:7, and shall be blessed for evermore: which
blessing comes not upon all, but upon the seed of righteous Abraham,
verse 16.

7. 2 Cor.5:21, "He hath made him to be sin for us, that we might be
made the righteousness of God in him." It was in his death that
Christ was made sin, or an offering for it. Now, for whomsoever he
was made sin, they are made the righteousness of God in him: "By his
stripes we are healed," Isa 53:5; John 15:13, "Greater love hath no
man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Then,
to intercede is not of greater love than to die, nor any thing else
that he doth for his elect. If, then, he laid down his life for all,
which is the greatest, why doth he not also the rest for them, and
save them to the uttermost?

8. John 17:9, "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for
them which then hast given me; for they are thine." And verse 19,
"For their sakes I sanctify myself."

9. Eph. 5:25, "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved
the church, and gave himself for it;" as [also] Acts 20:28. The
object of Christ's love and his death is here asserted to be his
bride, his church; and that as properly as a man's own wife is the
only allowed object of his conjugal affections. And if Christ had a
love to others so as to die for them, then is there in the
exhortation a latitude left unto men, in conjugal affections, for
other women besides their wives.

I thought to have added other arguments, as intending a clear
discussing of the whole controversy; but, upon a review of what hath
been said, I do with confidence take up and conclude that those
which have been already urged will be enough to satisfy them who
will be satisfied with any thing, and those that are obstinate will
not be satisfied with more. So of our arguments here shall be an
end.

 

Promoting a Greater Understanding of the Discovery of the Americas