John Owen’s Death of Death

THE DEATH OF DEATH IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST
A TREATISE OF THE REDEMPTION AND RECONCILIATION THAT IS IN THE BLOOD 0F
CHRIST, WITH THE MERIT THEREOF, AND SATISFACTION WROUGHT THEREBY.

John Owen

BOOK I
CHAPTER I

In general of the end of the death of Christ, as it is in the Scripture proposed. By the end of the
death of Christ, we mean in general, both,–first, that which his Father and himself intended in it;
and, secondly, that which was effectually fulfilled and accomplished by it. Concerning either we
may take a brief view of the expressions used by the Holy Ghost:–
I. For the first. Will you know the end wherefore, and the intention wherewith, Christ came into
the world? Let us ask himself (who knew his own mind, as also all the secrets of his Father’s
bosom), and he will tell us that the "Son of man came to save that which was lost," Matt. 18:11,–
to recover and save poor lost sinners; that was his intent and design, as is again asserted, Luke
19:10. Ask also his apostles, who know his mind, and they will tell you the same. So Paul, I Tim.
1:15, "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world
to save sinners." Now, if you will ask who these sinners are towards whom he hath this gracious
intent and purpose, himself tells you, Matt. 20:28, that he came to "give his life a ransom for
many;" in other places called us, believers, distinguished from the world: for be "gave himself for
our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our
Father," Gal. 1:4. That was the will and intention of God, that he should give himself for us, that
we might be saved, being separated from the world. They are his church: Eph. 5:25-27, "He loved
the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water
by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or
any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish:" which last words express also the
very aim and end of Christ in giving himself for any, even that they may be made fit for God, and
brought nigh unto him;–the like whereof is also asserted, Tit 2:14, "He gave himself for us, that
he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good
works." Thus clear, then, and apparent, is the intention and design of Christ and his Father in this
great work, even what it was, and towards whom,– namely, to save us, to deliver us from the evil
world, to purge and wash us, to make us holy, zealous, fruitful in good works, to render us
acceptable, and to bring us unto God; for through him "we have access into the grace wherein we
stand Rom. 5:2.
II. The effect, also, and actual product of the work itself, or what is accomplished and fulfilled by
the death, blood-shedding, or oblation of Jesus Christ, is no less clearly manifested, but is as
fully, and very often more distinctly, expressed;–as, first, Reconciliation with God, by removing
and slaying the enmity that was between him and us; for "when we were enemies we were
reconciled to God by the death of his Son," Rom. 5:10. "God was in him reconciling the world
unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them," 2 Cor. 5:19; yea, he hath "reconciled us to
himself by Jesus Christ," verse 18. And if you would know how this reconstruction was effected,
the apostle will tell you that "he abolished in his flesh the enmity, the law of commandments
consisting in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; and that
he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby," Eph.
2:l5, 16: so that "he is our peace," verse l4. Secondly, Justification, by taking away the guilt of
sins, procuring remission and pardon of them, redeeming us from their power, with the curse and
wrath due unto us for them; for "by his own blood he entered into the holy place, having obtained
eternal redemption for us" Heb. 9:12. "He redeemed us from the curse, being made a curse for
us," Gal. 3:13; "his own self bearing our sins in his own body on the tree," 1 Pet. 2:24. We have
"all sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" but are "justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in
his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins" Rom. 3:23-25: for "in him we
have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins," Col. 1:14. Thirdly,
Sanctification, by the purging away of the uncleanness and pollution of our sins, renewing in us
the image of God, and supplying us with the graces of the Spirit of holiness: for "the blood of
Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself to God, purgeth our consciences from dead
works that we may serve the living God," Heb. 9:14; yea, "the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us
from all sin," I John 1:7. "By himself he purged our sins," Heb. 1:3. To "sanctify the people with
his own blood, he suffered without the gate," chap. 13:12. "He gave himself for the church to
sanctify and cleanse it, that it should be holy and without blemish," Eph.5:25-27. Peculiarly
amongst the graces of the Spirit, "it is given to us," in-behalf-of Christ "for Christ’s sake, to believe
on him," Phil 1:29; God "blessing us in him with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places," Eph.
1:3. Fourthly, Adoption, with that evangelical liberty and all those glorious privileges which
appertain to the sons of God; for "God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons," Gal 4:4, 5.
Fifthly, Neither do the effects of the death of Christ rest here; they leave us not until we are
settled in heaven, in glory and immortality for ever. Our inheritance is a "purchased possession,"
Eph 1:14: "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for
the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called
might receive the promise of eternal inheritance," Heb. 9:15. The sum of all is,–The death and
blood-shedding of Jesus Christ hath wrought, and doth effectually procure, for all those that are
concerned in it, eternal redemption, consisting in grace here and glory hereafter.
III. Thus full, clear, and evident are the expressions in the Scripture concerning the ends and
effects of the death of Christ, that a man would think every one might run and read. But we must
stay: among all things in Christian religion, there is scarce any thing more questioned than this,
which seems to be a most fundamental principle. A spreading persuasion there is of a general
ransom to be paid by Christ for all; that he died to redeem all and every one,–not only for many,
his church, the elect of God, but for every one also of the posterity of Adam. Now, the masters of
this opinion do see full well and easily, that if that be the end of the death of Christ which we have
from the Scripture asserted, if those before recounted be the immediate fruits and products
thereof, then one of these two things will necessarily follow:–that either, first, God and Christ
failed of their end proposed, and did not accomplish that which they intended, the death of Christ
being not a fitly-proportioned means for the attaining of that end (for any cause of failing cannot
be assigned); which to assert seems to us blasphemously injurious to the wisdom, power, and
perfection of God, as likewise derogatory to the worth and value of the death of Christ;–or else,
that all men, all the posterity of Adam, must be saved, purged, sanctified, and glorified; which
surely they will not maintain, at least the Scripture and the woeful experience of millions will not
allow. Wherefore, to cast a tolerable color upon their persuasion, they must and do deny that God
or his Son had any such absolute aim or end in the death or blood-shedding of Jesus Christ, or
that any such thing was immediately procured and purchased by it, as we before recounted; but
that God intended nothing, neither was any thing effected by Christ,–that no benefit ariseth to any
immediately by his death but what is common to all and every soul, though never so cursedly
unbelieving here and eternally damned hereafter, until an act of some, not procured for them by
Christ, (for if it were, why have they it not all alike?) to wit, faith, do distinguish them from others.
Now, this seeming to me to enervate the virtue, value, fruits and effects of the satisfaction and
death of Christ,–serving, besides,for a basis and foundation to a dangerous, uncomfortable,
erroneous persuasion-I shall, by the Lord’s assistance, declare what the Scripture holds out in
both these things, both that assertion which is intended to be proved, and that which is brought
for the proof thereof; desiring the Lord by his Spirit to lead us into all truth, to give us
understanding in all things, and if any one be otherwise minded, to reveal that also unto him.

CHAPTER II
Of the nature of an end in general, and some distinctions about it.
I. The end of any thing is that which the agent intendeth to accomplish in and by the operation
which is proper unto its nature, and which it applieth itself unto,–that which any one aimeth at,
and designeth in himself to attain, as a thing good and desirable unto him in the state and
condition wherein he is. So the end which Noah proposed unto himself in the building of the ark
was the preservation of himself and others. According to the will of God, he made an ark to
preserve himself and his family from the flood: "According to all that God commanded him, so did
he," Gen. 6:22. That which the agent doth, or whereto he applieth himself, for the compassing his
proposed end, is called the means; which two do complete the whole reason of working in free
intellectual agents, for I speak only of such as work according to choice or election. So Absalom
intending a revolt from his father, to procure the crown and kingdom for himself, "he prepared him
horses and chariots, and fifty men to run before him," 2 Sam. 15:1; and farther, by fair words, and
glossing compliances, "he stole the hearts of the men of Israel" verse 6; then pretends a sacrifice
at Hebron, where he makes a strong conspiracy, verse 12,–all which were the means he used for
the attaining of his fore-proposed end.
II. Between both these, end and means, there is this relation, that (though in sundry kinds) they
are mutually causes one of another. The end is the first, principal, moving cause of the whole. It is
that for whose sake the whole work is. No agent applies itself to action but for an end; and were it
not by that determined to some certain effect, thing, way, or manner of working, it would no more
do one thing than another. The inhabitants of the old world desiring and intending unity and
cohabitation, with perhaps some reserves to provide for their safety against a second storm, they
cry, "Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make
us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth," Gen. 9:4. First, They
lay down their aim and design, and then let out the means in their apprehension conducing
thereunto. And manifest, then, it is, that the whole reason and method of affairs that a wise
worker or agent, according to the counsel, proposeth to himself is taken from the end which he
aims at; that is, in intention and contrivance, the beginning of all that order which is in working.
Now, the means are all those things which are used for the attaining of the end proposed,–as
meat for the preservation of life, sailing in a ship for him that would pass the sea, laws for the
quiet continuance of human society; and they are the procuring cause of the end, in one kind or
another. Their existence is for the ends sake, and the end hath its rise out of them, following them
either morally as their desert, or naturally as their fruit and product. First, In a moral sense. When
the action and the end are to be measured or considered in reference to a moral rule, or law
prescribed to the agent, then the means are the deserving or meritorious cause of the end; as, if
Adam had continued in his innocency, and done all things according to the law given unto him,
the end procured thereby had been a blessed life to eternity; as now the end of any sinful act is
death, the curse of the law. Secondly, When the means are considered only in their natural
relation, then they are the instrumentally efficient cause of the end. So Joab intending the death
of Abner, "he smote him with his spear under the fifth rib, that he died," 2 Sam. 3:27. And when
Benaiah, by the command of Solomon, fell upon Shimei the wounds he gave him were the
efficient of his death, I Kings 2:46. In which regard there is no difference between the murdering
of an innocent man and the executing of an offender; but as they are under a moral
consideration, their ends follow their deservings, in respect of conformity to the rule, and so there
is chasma megas between them.
III. The former consideration, by reason of the defect and perverseness of some agents (for
otherwise these things are coincident), holds out a twofold end of things,–first, of the work, and,
secondly, of the workman; of the act and the agent: for when the means assigned for the attaining
of any end are not proportioned unto it, nor, fitted for it, according to that rule which the agent is to
work by, then it cannot be but that he must aim at one thing and another follow, in respect of the
morality of the work. So Adam is enticed into a desire to be like God; this now he makes his aim,
which: to effect he eats the forbidden fruit, and that contracts a guilt which he aimed not at. But
when the agent acts aright, and as it should do,–when it aims at an end that is proper to it,
belonging to its proper perfection and condition, and worketh by such means as are fit and
suitable to the end proposed,–the end of the work and the workman are one and the same; as
when Abel intended the worship of the Lord, he offered a sacrifice through faith, acceptable unto
him; or as a man, desiring salvation through Christ, applieth himself to get an interest in him.
Now, the sole reason of this diversity is, that secondary agents, such as men are, have an end
set and appointed to their actions by Him which giveth them an external rule or law to work by,
which shall always attend them in their working, whether they will or no. God only, whose will and
good pleasure is the sole rule of all those works which outwardly are of him, can never deviate in
his actions, nor have any end attend or follow his acts not precisely by him intended.
IV. Again; the end of every free agent is either that which he effecteth, or that for whose sake he
doth effect it. When a builds a house to let to hire, that which he effecteth is the building of a
house; that which moveth him to do it is love of gain. The physician cures the patient, and is
moved to it by his reward. The end which Judas aimed at in his going to the priests, bargaining
with them, conducting the soldiers to the garden, kissing Christ, was the betraying of his Master;
but the end for whose sake the whole undertaking was set on foot was the obtaining of the thirty
pieces of silver: "What will ye give me, and I will do it?" The end which God effected by the death
of Christ was the satisfaction of his justice: the end for whose sake he did it was either supreme,
or his own glory; or subordinate, ours with him.
V. Moreover, the means are of two sorts:–First, Such as have a true goodness in themselves
without reference to any farther kind; though not so considered as we use them for means. No
means, as a means is considered as good in itself, but only as conducible to a farther end; it is
repugnant to the nature of means, as such, to be considered as good in themselves. Study is in
itself the most noble employment of the soul; but, aiming at wisdom or knowledge, we consider it
as good only inasmuch as it conducteth to that end, otherwise as "a weariness of the flesh," Eccl.
12: 12. Secondly, Such as have no good at all in any kind, as in themselves considered, but
merely as conducing to that end which they are fit to attain. They receive all their goodness
(which is but relative) from that whereunto they are appointed, in themselves no way desirable; as
the cutting off a leg or an arm for the preservation of life, taking a bitter potion for health’s sake,
throwing corn and lading into the sea to prevent shipwreck. Of which nature is the death of Christ,
as we shall afterward declare.
VI. These things being thus proposed in general, our next task must be to accommodate them to
the present business in hand; which we shall do in order, by laying down the agent working, the
means wrought and the end effected, in the great work of our redemption; for these three must be
orderly considered and distinctly, that we may have a right apprehension of the whole: into the
first whereof, sun theo, we make an entrance in [chapter third.]

CHAPTER III
Of the agent or chief author of the work of our redemption, and of the first thing distinctly ascribed
to the person of the Father.
I. The agent in, and chief author of, this great work of our redemption is the whole blessed
Trinity; for all the works which outwardly are of the Deity are undivided and belong equally to
each person, their distinct manner of subsistence and order being observed. It is true, there were
sundry other instrumental causes in the oblation, or rather passion of Christ but the work cannot
in any sense be ascribed unto them;–for in respect of God the Father, the issue of their
endeavors was exceeding contrary to their own intentions, and in the close they did nothing but
what the "hand and counsel of God had before determined should be done," Acts 4:28; and in
respect of Christ they were no way able to accomplish what they aimed at, for he himself laid
down his life, and none was able to take it from him, John 10:17, 18: so that they are to be
excluded from this consideration. In the several persons of the holy Trinity, the joint author of the
whole work, the Scripture proposeth distinct and sundry acts or operations peculiarly assigned
unto them; which, according to our weak manner of apprehension, we are to consider severally
and apart; which also we shall do, beginning with them that are ascribed to the Father.
II. Two peculiar acts there are in this work of our redemption by the blood of Jesus, which may
be and are properly assigned to the person of the FATHER:–First, The sending, of his Son into
the world for this employment. Secondly, A laying the punishment due to our sin upon him.
1. The Father loves the world, and sends his Son to die: He "sent his Son into the world that the
world through him might be saved," John 3:l6,.17. He "sending his Son in the likeness of sinful
flesh and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in
us," Rom. 8:3,4. He "set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood," chap. 3:25. For
"when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under
the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons,"
Gal. 4:4, 5. So more than twenty times in the Gospel of John there is mention of this sending; and
our Saviour describes himself by this periphrasis, "Him whom the Father hath sent," John 10:36;
and the Father by this, "He who sent me," chap. 5:37. So that this action of sending is appropriate
to the Father, according to his promise that he would "send us a Saviour, a great one, to deliver
us," Isa. 19:20; and to the profession of our Saviour, "I have not spoken in secret from the
beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent
me," Isa. 48:16. Hence the Father himself is sometimes called our Saviour: I Tim. 1:1, "According
to the commandment of God our Saviour." Some copies, indeed, read it, "of God and our
Saviour;" but the interposition of that particle "kai" arose, doubtless, from a misprision that Christ
alone is called Saviour. But directly this is the same with that parallel place of Tit. 1:3, "According
to the commandment of God our Saviour," where no interposition of that conjunctive particle can
have place; the same title being also in other places ascribed to him, as Luke 1:47, "My spirit hath
rejoiced in God my Saviour." As also I Tim. 4:10, "We trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of
all men, specially of them that believe;" though in this last place it be not ascribed unto him with
reference to his redeeming us by Christ, but his saving and preserving all by his providence. So
also Tit. 2:10, 3:4; Deut. 32:15; 1 Sam 10:19; Ps. 24:5, 25:5; Isa. 12:2, 40:10, 45:15; Jer. 14:8;
Micah 7:7; Hab. 3:18; most of which places have reference to his sending of Christ, which is also
distinguished into three several acts, which in order we must lay down:–
(1.) An authoritative imposition of the office of Mediator, which Christ closed withal by his
voluntary susception of it, willingly undergoing the office, wherein by dispensation the Father had
and exercised a kind of superiority, which the Son, though "in the form of God," humbled himself
unto, Phil 2:6-8. And of this there may conceived two parts:–
[1.] The purposed imposition of his counsel, or his eternal counsel for the setting apart of his Son
incarnate to this office, saying unto him, "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of
me, and I shall give thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for
thy possession," Ps. 2:7, 8. He said unto him, "Sit thou at my right hand until I make thine
enemies thy footstool;" for "the Lord swore, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the
order of Melchizedek," Ps. 110:1, 4. He appointed him to be "heir of all things," Heb. 1:2, having
"ordained him to be Judge of quick and dead," Acts 10:42; for unto this he was "ordained before
the foundation of the world," 1 Pet. 1:20., and "determined, (horizo), to be the Son of God with
power," Rom. 1:4, "that he might be the first-born among many brethren," chip. 8:29. I know that
this is an act eternally established in the mind and will of God, and so not to be ranged in order
with the others, which are all temporary, and had their beginning in the fullness of time, of all
which this first is the spring and fountain, according to that of James, Acts 15:18, "Known unto
God are all his works from the beginning of the world;" but yet, it being no unusual form of
speaking that the purpose should also be comprehended in that which holds out the
accomplishment of it, aiming at truth and not exactness, we pass it thus.
[2.] The actual inauguration or solemn admission of Christ into his office; "committing all
judgment unto the Son," John 5:22; "making him to be both Lord and Christ," Acts 2:36;
"appointing him over his whole house," Heb. 3:1-6;–which is that "anointing of the most Holy,"
Dan. 9:24; God "anointing him with the oil of gladness above his fellows" Ps. 45:7: for the actual
setting apart of Christ to his office is said to be by unction, because all those holy things which
were types of him, as the ark, the altar, etc., were set apart and consecrated by anointing, Exod.
30:25-28, etc. To this also belongs that public testification by innumerable angels from heaven of
his nativity, declared by one of them to the shepherds. "Behold," saith he, "I bring you good
tidings of great joy, which shall be unto all people; for unto you is born this day in the city of David
a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord," Luke 2:10, 11;–which message was attended by and closed
with that triumphant exultation of the host of heaven, "Glory be to God on high, on earth peace,
towards men good-will," verse 14: with that redoubled voice which afterward came from the
excellent glory, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased," Matt.. 3:7, 17:5; 2 Pet. 1:7.
If these things ought to be distinguished and placed in their own order, they may be considered in
these three several acts:–First, The glorious proclamation which he made of his nativity, when he
"prepared him a body," Heb. 10:5, bringing his First-begotten into the world, and saying, "Let all
the angels of God worship him" chap. 1:6, sending them to proclaim the message which we
before recounted. Secondly, Sending the Spirit visibly, in the form of a dove, to light upon him at
the time of his baptism, Matt. 3:16, when he was endued with a fullness thereof, for the
accomplishment of the work and discharge of the office whereunto he was designed, attended
with that voice whereby he owned him from heaven as his only-beloved. Thirdly, The "crowning of
him with glory and honour," in his resurrection, ascension, and sitting down "on the right hand of
the Majesty on high." Heb. 1:3; setting "him as his king upon his holy hill of Zion," Ps. 2:6; when
"all power was given unto him in heaven and in earth," Matt, 28:18, "all things being put under his
feet" Heb. 2:7, 8; himself highly exalted, and "a name given him above every name, that at," etc.,
Phil. 2:9-11. Of which it pleased him to appoint witnesses of all sorts; –angels from heaven, Luke
24:4, Acts 1:10 ; the dead out of the graves, Matt. 27:52; the apostles among and unto the living,
Acts 2:32; with those more than five hundred brethren, to whom he appeared at once, 1 Cor.
15:6. Thus gloriously was he inaugurated into his office, in the several sets and degrees thereof,
God saying unto him, "It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of
Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles that
thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth," Isa. 49:6.
Between these two acts I confess there intercedes a twofold promise of God;–one, of giving a
Saviour to his people, a Mediator, according to his former purpose, as Gen. 3:15, "The seed of
the woman shall break the serpent’s head;" and, "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a
lawgiver from between his feet, till Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people
be," chap. 49:10. Which he also foresignified by many sacrifices and other types, with prophetical
predictions: "Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who
prophesied of the grace that should come unto you; searching what or what manner of time the
Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ,
and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto
us they did minister the things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the
gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to
look into," 1 Pet 1:10-12. The other is a promise of applying the benefits purchased by this
Saviour so designed to them that should believe on him, to be given in fullness of time, according
to the former promises; telling Abraham, that "in his seed all the families of the earth should be
blessed," and justifying himself by the same faith, Gen, 12:3, 15:6. But these things belong rather
to the application wholly, which was equal both before and after his actual mission.
(2.) The second act of the Father’s sending the Son is the furnishing of him in his sending with a
fullness of all gifts and graces that might any way be requisite for the office he was to undertake,
the work he was to undergo, and the charge he had over the house of God. There was, indeed, in
Christ a twofold fullness and perfection of all spiritual excellencies:– First, the natural all-sufficient
perfection of his Deity, as one with his Father in respect of his divine nature: for his glory was "the
glory of the only-begotten of the Father," John 1:14. He was "in the form of God, and thought it
not robbery to be equal with God," Phil. 2:6; being the "fellow of the LORD of hosts," Zech. 13:7.
Whence that glorious appearance, Isa. 6: 3, 4, when the seraphims cried one to another, and
said, "Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of
the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke." And the
prophet cried, "Mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts," verse 5. Even concerning this
vision the apostle saith, "Isaiah saw him, and spoke of his glory," John 12:41. Of which glory, he
as it were emptied himself for a season, when he was "found in the form" or condition "of a
servant, humbling himself unto death," Phil. 2:7, 8; laying aside that glory which attended his
Deity, outwardly appearing to have "neither form, nor beauty, nor comeliness, that he should be
desired," Isa. 53:2 But this fullness we do not treat of, it being not communicated to him, but
essentially belonging to his person, which is eternally begotten of the person of his Father.
The second fullness that was in Christ was a communicated fullness, which was in him by
dispensation from his Father, bestowed upon him to fit him for his work and office as he was and
is the "Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus," I Tim. 2:5; not as he is the "LORD
of hosts," but as he is "Emmanuel, God with us," Matt. 1:23; as he was a "son given to us, called
Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace, upon
whose shoulder the government was to be," Isa. 9:6. It is a fullness of grace; not that essential
which is of the nature of the Deity, but that which is habitual and infused into the humanity as
personally united to the other; which, though it be not absolutely infinite, as the other is, yet it
extends itself to all perfections of grace, both in respect of parts and degrees. There is no grace
that is not in Christ, and every grace is in him in the highest degree: so that whatsoever the
perfection of grace, either for the several kinds or respective advancements thereof, requireth, is
in him habitually, by the collation of his Father for this very purpose, and for the accomplishment
of the work designed; which, though (as before) it cannot properly be said to be infinite, yet it is
boundless and endless. It is in him as the light in the beams of the sun, and as water in a living
fountain which can never fail. He is the "candlestick" from whence the "golden pipes do empty the
golden oil out of themselves," Zech. 4:12, into all that are his; for he is "the beginning, the firstborn
from the dead, in all things having the pre-eminence; for it pleased the Father that in him
should all fullness dwell;" Col. 1:18, 19. In him he caused to be "hid all the treasurer of wisdom
and knowledge," chap. 2:3; and "in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily (somatikos),"
substantially or personally, verse 9; that "of his fullness we might all receive grace for grace,"
John 1:16, in a continual supply. So that, setting upon the work of redemption, he looks upon this
in the first place. "The Spirit of the Lord God," saith he, "is upon me; because the LORD hath
anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all
that mourn," Isa. 61:1, 2. And this was the "anointing with the oil of gladness" which he had
"above his fellows," Ps. 45:7; "it was upon his head, and ran down to his beard, yea, down to the
skirts of his garments," Ps. 133:2, that every one covered with the garment of his righteousness
might be made partaker of it "The Spirit of the LORD did rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and
understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the
LORD," Isa. 11:2; and that not in parcels and beginnings as in us, proportioned to our measure
and degrees of sanctification, but in a fullness, for "he received not the Spirit by measure," John
3:34;–that is, it was not so with him when he come to the full measure of the stature of his age,
as Eph. 4:13; for otherwise it was manifested in him and collated on him by degrees, for he
"increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man," Luke 2:51 Hereunto was
added "all power in heaven and earth, which was given unto him," Matt. 28:18; "power over all
flesh, to give eternal life to as many as he would," John 17:2. Which we might branch into many
particulars, but so much shall suffice to set forth the second act of God in sending his Son.
(3.) The third act of this sending is his entering into covenant and compact with his Son
concerning the work to be undertaken, and the issue or event thereof; of which there be two
parts:–
First, His promise to protect and assist him in the accomplishment and perfect fulfilling of the
whole business and dispensation about which he was employed, or which he was to undertake.
The Father engaged himself, that for his part, upon his Son’s undertaking this great work of
redemption, he would not be wanting in any assistance in trials, strength against oppositions,
encouragement against temptations, and strong consolation in the midst of terrors, which might
be any way necessary or requisite to carry him on through all difficulties to the end of so great an
employment;–upon which he undertakes this heavy burden, so full of misery and trouble: for the
Father before this engagement requires no less of him than that he should "become a Saviour,
and be afflicted in all the affliction of his people," Isa. 63:8, 9: yea, that although he were "the
fellow of the LORD of host," yet he should endure the "sword" that was drawn against him as the
"shepherd" of the sheep, Zech. 13:7; "treading the winepress alone, until he became red in his
apparel," Isa. 63:2, 3: yea, to be "stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted; wounded for our
transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities; to be bruised and put to grief; to make his soul an
offering for sin, and to bear the iniquity of many," Isa 53.; to be destitute of comfort so far as to
cry, "my God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Ps. 22:1. No wonder, then, if upon this
undertaking the Lord promised to make "his mouth like a sharp sword, to hide him in the shadow
of his hand, to make him a polished shaft, and to hide him in his quiver, to make him his servant
in whom he would be glorified," Isa. 49:2, 3; that though "the kings of the earth should set
themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against him, yet he would laugh them to scorn,
and set him as king upon his holy hill of Zion," Ps. 2:2, 4, 6; though the "builders did reject him,"
yet he should "become the head of the comer," to the amazement and astonishment of all the
world, Ps. 118:22, 23; Matt. 21:42, Mark 12:10, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11, 12, 1 Pet 2:4; yea, he
would "lay him for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone, a sure
foundation," Isa. 28:16, that "whosoever should fall upon him should be broken, but upon
whomsoever he should fall he should grind him to powder,’ Matt. 21:44. Hence arose that
confidence of our Saviour in his greatest and utmost trials, being assured, by virtue of his Father’s
engagement in this covenant, upon a treaty with him about the redemption of man, that he would
never leave him nor forsake him. "I gave," saith he, "my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to
them that plucked off the hair: I hid not my face from shame and spitting," Isa. 50:6. But with what
confidence, blessed Savior, didst thou undergo all this shame and sorrow! Why, "The Lord GOD
will help me; therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I
know; that I shall not be ashamed. He is near that justifieth me; who will contend with me? let us
stand together: who is mine adversary? let him come near to me. Behold, the Lord GOD will help
me; who is he that condemn me? Lo! they shall all wax old as a garment; the moth shall eat them
up," verses 7-9. With this assurance he was brought as a "lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep
before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth," Isa. 53:7: for "when he was reviled,
he reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that
judgeth righteously," 1 Pet. 2:23. So that the ground of our Saviour’s confidence and assurance in
this great undertaking, and a strong motive to exercise his graces received in the utmost
endurings, was this engagement of his Father upon this compact of assistance and protection.
Secondly, [His promise] of success, or a good issue out of all his sufferings, and a happy
accomplishment and attainment of the end of his great undertaking. Now, of all the rest this
chiefly is to be considered, as directly conducing to the business proposed, which yet would not
have been so clear without the former considerations; for whatsoever it was that God promised
his Son should be fulfilled and attained by him, that certainly was it at which the Son aimed in the
whole undertaking, and designed it as the end of the work that was committed to him, and which
alone he could and did claim upon the accomplishment of his Father’s will. What this was, and
the promises whereby it is at large set forth, ye have Isa. 49: "Thou shalt be my servent," saith
the Lord, "to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give
thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation to the end of the earth. Kings
shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful." And he will
certainly accomplish this engagement: "I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the
people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; that thou mayest say to
the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves. They shall feed in the
ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places. They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall
the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs
of water shall be guide them. And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be
exalted. Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and
these from the land of Sinim," verses 6-12=2E By all which expressions the Lord evidently and
clearly engageth himself to his Son, that he should gather to himself a glorious church of
believers from among Jews and Gentiles, through all the world, that should be brought unto him,
and certainly fed in full pasture, and refreshed by the springs of water, all the spiritual springs of
living water which flow from God in Christ for their everlasting salvation. This, then, our Saviour
certainly aimed at, as being the promise upon which he undertook the work,–the gathering of the
sons of God together, their bringing unto God, and passing to eternal salvation; which being well
considered, it will utterly overthrow the general ransom or universal redemption, as afterward will
appear. In the 53rd chapter of the same prophecy, the Lord is more express and punctual in
these promises to his Son, assuring him that when he "made his soul an offering for sin, he
should see his seed, and prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD should prosper in his
hand; that he should see of the travail of his soul, and be satisfied; by his knowledge he should
justify many; that, he should divide a portion with the great, and the spoil with the strong," verses
10 12. He was, you see, to see his seed by covenant, and to raise up a spiritual seed unto God, a
faithful people, to be prolonged a preserved throughout all generations; which, how well it
consists with their persuasion who in terms have affirmed "that the death of Christ might have
had its full and utmost effect and yet none be saved," I cannot see, though some have boldly
affirmed it and all the assertors of universal redemption do tacitly grant, when they come to the
assigning of the proper ends and effects of the death of Christ. "The pleasure of the LORD," also,
was to "prosper in his hand;" which what it was he declares, Heb. 2:10, even "bringing of many
sons unto glory;" for "God sent his only-begotten Son into the world that we live through him," I
John 4:9; as we shall afterward more abundantly declare. But the promises of God made unto
him in their agreement, and so, consequently, his own aim and intention, may be seen in nothing
more manifestly than in the request that our Saviour makes upon the accomplishment of the work
about which he was sent; which certainly was neither for more nor less than God had engaged
himself to him for. "I have," saith he, "glorified thee on earth, I have finished the work which thou
gavest me to do," John 17:4. And now, what doth he require after the manifestation of his eternal
glory, of which for a season he had emptied himself, verse 5? Clearly a full confluence of the love
of God and fruits of that love upon all his elect, in faith, sanctification, and glory. God gave them
unto him, and he sanctified himself to be a sacrifice for their sake, praying for their sanctification,
verses 17-19; their preservation in peace, or communion one with another, and union with God,
verses 20, 21, "I pray not for these alone" (that is, his apostles), "but for them also which shall
believe on me through their word; that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in
thee, that they also may be one in us;" and lastly, their glory, verse 24, "Father, I will that they
also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which
thou hast given me." All which several postulata are no doubt grounded upon the fore-cited
promises which by his Father were made unto him. And in this, not one word concerning all and
every one, but expressly the contrary, verse 9. Let this, then, be diligently observed, that the
promise of God unto his Son, and the request of the Son unto his Father, are directed to this
peculiar end of bringing sons unto God. And this is the first act, consisting of these three
particulars.
2. The second is of laying upon him the punishment of sins, everywhere ascribed unto the
Father: "Awake; 0 sword, against my shepherd, against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD
of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered," Zech. 13:7. What here is set
down imperatively, by way of command, is in the gospel indicatively expounded. "I will smite the
shepherd,: and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad," Matt. 26:31. "He was stricken,
smitten of God, and afflicted;" yea, "the LORD laid upon him the iniquity of us all;" yea, "it pleased
the LORD to bruise him, and to put him to grief," Isa. 53:4, 6, 10. "He made him to be sin for us,
who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him," 2 Cor. 5:21. The
adjunct in both: places is put for the subject, as the opposition between his being made sin and
our being made righteousness declareth. "Him who knew no sin,"-that is, who deserved no
punishment,–"him hath he made to be sin," or laid the punishment due to sin upon him. Or
perhaps, in the latter place, sin may be taken for an offering or sacrifice for the expiation of sin,
(hamartia) answering in this place to the word: CHATTATH in the Old Testament, which signifieth
both sin and the sacrifice for it. And this the Lord did; for as for Herod, Pontius Pilate, with the
Gentiles, and the people of Israel, when they were gathered together, they did nothing but "what
his hand and counsel bad determined before to be done," Acts 4:27,28. Whence the great
shakings of our saviour were in his close conflict with his Father’s wrath, and that burden which
by himself he immediately imposed on him. When there was no hand or instrument outwardly
appearing to put him to any suffering or cruciating torment, then he "began to be sorrowful, even
unto death" Matt. 26:37, 38; to wit, when he was in the garden with his three choice apostles,
before the traitor or any of his accomplices appeared, then was he "sore amazed, and very
heavy," Mark 14:33. That was the time, "in the days of his flesh, when he offered up prayers and
supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death," Heb.
5:7; which how he performed the evangelist describeth, Luke 22:43, 44: "There appeared an
angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. But being in an agony he prayed more earnestly:
and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." Surely it was a
close and strong trial, and that immediately from his Father, he now underwent; for how meekly
and cheerfully doth he I submit, without any regret or trouble of spirit, to all the cruelty of men and
violence offered to his body, until this conflict being renewed again, he cries, "My God, my God,
why hast thou forsaken me?" And this, by the way, will be worth our observation that we may
know with whom our Saviour chiefly had to do, and what was that which he underwent for
sinners; which also will give some light to the grand query concerning the persons of them for
whom he undertook all this. His sufferings were far from consisting in mere corporal perpessions
and afflictions, with such impressions upon his soul and spirit as were the effects and issues only
of them. It was no more nor less than the curse of the law of God which he underwent for us: for
he freed us from the curse "by being made a curses," Gal 3:13; which contained all the
punishment that was due to sin, either in the severity of God’s justice, or according to the
exigence of that law which required obedience. That the execration of the law should be only
temporal death, as the law was considered to be the instrument of the Jewish polity, and serving
that economy or dispensation, is true; but that it should be no more, as it is the universal rule of
obedience, and the bond of the covenant between God and man, is a foolish dream. Nay, but in
dying for us Christ did not only aim at our good, but also directly died in our stead. The
punishment due to our sin and the chastisement of our peace was upon him; which that it was the
pains of hell, in their nature and being, in their weight and pressure, though not in tendence and
continuance (it being impossible that he should be detained by death), who can deny and not be
injurious to the justice of God, which will inevitably inflict those pains to eternity upon sinners? It is
true, indeed, there is a relaxation of the law in respect of the persons suffering, God admitting of
commutation; as in the old law, when in their sacrifices the life of the beast was accepted (in
respect to the carnal part of the ordinances) for the life of the man. This is fully revealed, and we
believe it; but for any change of the punishment, in respect of the nature of it, where is the least
intimation of any alteration? We conclude, then, this second act of God, in laying the punishment
on him for us, with that of the prophet, "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every
one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all," Isa. 53:6: and add
thereunto this observation, that it seems strange to me that Christ should undergo the pains of
hell in their stead who lay in the pains of hell before he underwent those pains, and shall continue
in them to eternity; for "their worm dieth not, neither is their fire quenched." To which I may add
this dilemma to our Universalists:–God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the
pains of hell for, either all the sins of all men, or all the sins of some men, or some sins of all men.
If the last, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for, and so shall no man
be saved; for if God enter into judgment with us, though it were with all mankind for one sin, no
flesh should be justified in his sight: "If the LORD should mark iniquities, who should stand?"
Ps.130:3. We might all go to cast all that we have "to the moles and to the bats, to go into the
clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of
his majesty," Isa. 2:20, 21. If the second, that is it which we affirm, that Christ in their stead and
room suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the world. If the first, why, then, an not all freed
from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, "Because of their unbelief, they will not
believe." But this unbelief, is it a sin or not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be,
then Christ underwent the punishment due to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them
more than their other sins for which he died from partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not,
then did he not die for all their sins. Let them choose which part they will.

CHAPTER IV.
Of those things which in the work of redemption are peculiarly ascribed to the person of the Son.
SECONDLY, The SON was an agent in this great work, concurring by a voluntary susception, or
willing undertaking of the office imposed on him; for when the Lord said, "Sacrifice and offering he
would not: in burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin he had no pleasure," then said Christ, "Lo, I
come, (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, 0 God," Heb. 10:6, 7. All other
ways being rejected as insufficient, Christ undertaketh the task, "in whom alone the Father was
well pleased," Matt. 3:17. Hence he professeth that "he came not to do his own will, but the will of
him that sent him," John 4:38; yea, that it was his meat and drink to do his Father’s will, and to
finish his work, chap. 4:34. The first words that we find recorded of him in the Scripture are to the
same purpose, "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?" Luke 2:49. And at the
close of all he saith, "I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest
me to do," John 17:4; calling it everywhere his Father’s work that he did, or his Father’s will which
he came to accomplish, with reference to the imposition which we before treated of. Now, this
undertaking of the Son may be referred to three heads. The first being a common foundation for
both the others, being as it were the means in respect of them as the end, and yet in some sort
partaking of the nature of a distinct action, with a goodness in itself in reference to the main end
proposed to all three, we shall consider it apart; and that is,–
First, His incarnation, as usually it is called, or his taking of flesh, and pitching his tent amongst
us, John 1:14. His "being made of a woman," Gal 4:4, is usually called his incarnation; for this
was "the mystery of godliness, that God should be manifested in the flesh," 1 Tim. 3:16, thereby
assuming not any singular person, but our human nature, into personal union with himself. For,
"forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of
the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil,"
Heb. 2:14. It was the children that he considered, the "children whom the Lord gave him," verse
13. Their participation in flesh and blood moved him to partake of the same,–not because all the
world, all the posterity of Adam, but because the children were in that condition; for their sakes he
sanctified himself. Now, this emptying of the Deity, this humbling of himself, this dwelling amongst
us, was the sole act of the second person, or the divine nature in the second person, the Father
and the Spirit having no concurrence in it but by liking, approbation, and eternal counsel.
Secondly, His oblation, or "offering himself up to God for us without spot, to purge our
consciences from dead works," Heb. 9:14; "for he loved us, and washed us from our sins in his
own blood," Rev. 1:5. "He loved the church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and
cleanse it," Eph. 5:25, 26; taking the cup of wrath at his Father’s hands due to us, and drinking it
off, "but not for himself," Dan. 9:26: for, "for our sakes he sanctified himself," John 17:19, that is,
to be an offering, an oblation for sin; for "when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ
died for the ungodly," Rom. 5:6;–this being that which was typified out by all the institutions,
ordinances, and sacrifices of old; which when they were to have an end, then said Christ, "Lo, I
come to do thy will." Now, though the perfecting or consummating of this oblation be set out in the
Scripture chiefly in respect of what Christ suffered, and not so much in respect of what he did,
because it is chiefly considered as the means used by these three blessed agents for the
attaining of a farther end, yet in respect of his own voluntary giving up himself to be so an oblation
and a sacrifice, without which it would not have been of any value (for if the will of Christ had not
been in it, it could never have purged our sins), therefore, in that regard, I refer it to his actions.
He was the "Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world," John 1:29; the Lamb of God,
which himself had provided for a sacrifice. And how did this Lamb behave himself in it? with
unwillingness and struggling? No; he opened not his mouth: "He was brought as a lamb to the
slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth," Isa. 53:7.
Whence he saith, "I lay down my life. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have
power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again," John 10:17, 18. He might have been
cruciated on the part of God; but his death could not have been an oblation and offering had not
his will concurred. "But he loved me," saith the apostle, "and gave himself for me," Gal. 2:20.
Now, that alone deserves the name of a gift which is from a free and a willing mind, as Christ’s
was when "he loved us, and gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling
savour," Eph. 5:2. He does it cheerfully: "Lo, I come to do thy will, 0 God," Heb. 10:9;
and so "his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree," I Pet 2:24. Now, this oblation or
offering of Christ I would not tie up to any one thing, action, or passion, performance, or suffering;
but it compriseth the whole economy and dispensation of God manifested in the flesh and
conversing among us, with all those things which he performed in the days of his flesh, when he
offered up prayers and supplications, with strong cries and tears, until he had fully "by himself
purged our sins, and sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high," Heb. 1:3, "expecting till
his enemies be made his footstool," chap. 10:13,–all the whole dispensation of his coming and
ministering, until he had given his soul a price of redemption for many, Matt. 26:28. But for his
entering into the holy of holies, sprinkled with his own blood, and appearing so for us before the
majesty of God, by some accounted as the continuation of his oblation, we may refer unto,–
Thirdly, His intercession for all and every one of those for whom he gave himself for an oblation.
He did not suffer for them, and then refuse to intercede for them; he did not do the greater, and
omit the less. The price of our redemption is more precious in the eyes of God and his Son than
that it should, as it were, be cast away on perishing souls, without any care taken of what
becomes of them afterward. Nay, this also is imposed on Christ, with a promise annexed: "Ask of
me," saith the Lord, "and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts
of the earth for thy possession," Ps. 2:8; who accordingly tells his disciples that he had more work
to do for them in heaven. "I go," saith he, "to prepare a place for you, that I may come again and
receive you unto myself," John 14:2, 3. For as "the high priest went into the second [tabernacle]
alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and the errors of the
people," Heb. 9:7; so "Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by his own blood
entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us," verses 11, 12. Now,
what was this holy place whereinto he entered thus sprinkled with the blood of the covenant? and
to what end did he enter into it? Why, "he is not entered into the holy places made with hands,
which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for
us," verse 24. And what doth he there appear for? Why, to be our advocate, to plead our cause
with God, for the application of the good things procured by his oblation unto all them for whom
he was an offering; as the apostle tells us, "If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father,
Jesus Christ the righteous," I John 2:1. Why, how comes that to pass? "He is the propitiation for
our sins," verse 2. His being a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, is the foundation of his
interceding, the ground of it; and, therefore, they both belong to the same persons. Now, by the
way, we know that Christ refused to pray for the world, in opposition to his elect. "I pray for them,"
saith he: "I pray not for the world, but for them thou hast given me," John17:9. And therefore there
was no foundation for such an interceding for them, because he was not a propitiation for them.
Again; we know the Father always heareth the Son ("I knew," saith he, "that thou hearest me
always," chap. 11:42), that is, so to grant his request, according to the fore-mentioned
engagement, Ps. 2:8; and, therefore, if he should intercede for all, all should undoubtedly be
saved, for "he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever
liveth to make intercession for them," Heb. 7:25. Hence, is that confidence of the apostle, upon
that intercession of Christ, "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that
justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is
even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us," Rom. 8:33, 34. Where, also,
we cannot but observe that those for whom be died may assuredly conclude he maketh
intercession for them, and that none shall lay any thing to their charge,–which breaks the neck of
the general ransom; for according to that, he died for millions that have no interest in his
intercession, who shall have their sins laid to their charge, and perish under them: which might be
farther cleared up from the very nature of this intercession, which is not a humble, dejected
supplication, which beseems not that glorious state of advancement which he is possessed of
that sits at the right hand of the Majesty on high, but an authoritative presenting himself before
the throne of his Father, sprinkled with his own blood, for the making out to his people all spiritual
things that are procured by his oblation, saying, "Father, I will that those whom thou hast given
me be with me where I am" John 17:24. So that for whomsoever he suffered, he appears for
them in heaven with his satisfaction and merit. Here, also, we must call to mind what the Father
promised his Son upon his undertaking of this employment; for there is no doubt but that for that,
and that alone, doth Christ, upon the accomplishment of the whole, intercede with him about:
which was in sum that he might be the captain of salvation to all that believe on him, and
effectually bring many sons to glory. And hence it is, having such an high priest over the house of
God, we may draw near with the full assurance of faith, for by one offering he hath perfected for
ever them that are sanctified, Heb. 10:14. But of this more must be said afterward.

CHAPTER V.
The peculiar actions of the Holy Spirit in this business.
THIRDLY, In few words we may consider the actions of that agent, who in order is the third in that
blessed One, whose all is the whole, the HOLY SPIRIT, who is evidently concurring, in his own
distinct operation, to all the several chief or grand parts of this work. We may refer them to three
heads:–
First, The incarnation of the Son, with his plenary assistance in the course of his conversation
whilst he dwelt amongst us; for his mother was found with child, "to have conceived in her womb
of the Holy Ghost," Matt. 1:18. If you ask, with Mary, how that could be? the angel resolves both
her and us, as far as it is lawful for us to be acquainted with these mysterious things: Luke 1:35,
"The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." It was
an over shadowing power in the Spirit: so called by an allusion taken from fowls that cover their
eggs, that so by their warmth young may be hatched; for by the sole power of the Spirit was this
conception, who did "incubare foetui," as in the beginning of the world. Now, in process, as this
child was conceived by the power, so he was filled with the Spirit, and "waxed strong" in it, Luke
1:80; until, having received a fullness thereof, and not by any I limited measure, in the gifts and
graces of it, he was thoroughly furnished and fitted for his great undertaking.
Secondly, In his oblation, or passion (for they are both the same, with several respects,–one to
what he suffered, the other to what he did with, by, and under those sufferings), how "by the
Eternal Spirit he offered himself without spot to God," Heb. 9:14: whether it be meant of the
offering himself a bloody sacrifice on the cross, or his presentation of himself continually before
his Father,–it is by the Eternal Spirit. The willing offering himself through that Spirit was the
eternal fire under this sacrifice, which made it acceptable unto God. That which some contend,
that by the eternal Spirit is here meant our Saviour’s own Deity, I see no great ground for. Some
Greek and Latin copies read, not, as we commonly, PNEUMA AIONIOS, but PNEUMA HAGIOS,
and so the doubt is quite removed: and I see no reason why he may not as well be said to offer
himself through the Holy Spirit, as to be "declared to be the Son of God, according to the Spirit of
holiness, by the resurrection from the dead," as Rom. 1:4; as also to be "quickened by the Spirit,"
I Pet. 3:18. The working of the Spirit was required as well in his oblation as resurrection, in his
dying, as quickening.
Thirdly, In his resurrection; of which the apostle, Rom. 8:11, "But if the Spirit of him that raised up
Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your
mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in, you."
And thus have we discovered the blessed agents and undertakers in this work their several
actions and orderly concurrence unto the whole; which, though they may be thus distinguished,
yet they are not so divided but that every one must be ascribed to the whole nature, whereof each
person is "in solidum" partaker. And as they begin it, so they will jointly carry along the application
of it unto its ultimate issue and accomplishment; for we must "give thanks to the Father, which
hath made us meet" (that is, by his Spirit) "to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his
dear Son: in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins," Col.
1:12, 13.

CHAPTER VI.
The means used by the fore-recounted agents in this work.
OUR next employment, following the order of execution, not intention, will be the discovery or
laying down of the means in this work; which are, indeed, no other but the several actions before
recounted, but now to be considered under another respect,–as they are a means ordained for
the obtaining of a proposed end; of which afterward. Now, because the several actions of Father
and Spirit were all exercised towards Christ, and terminated in him, as God and man, he only and
his performances are to be considered as the means in this work, the several concurrences of
both the other persons before mentioned being presupposed as necessarily antecedent or
concomitant.
The means, then, used or ordained by these agents for the end proposed is that whole economy
or dispensation carried along to the end, from whence our Saviour Jesus Christ is called a
Mediator; which may be, and are usually, as I mentioned before,, distinguished into two parts:-
First, his oblation; secondly, his intercession.
By his oblation we do not design only the particular offering of himself upon the cross an offering
to his Father, as the Lamb of God without spot or blemish, when he bare our sins or carried them
up with him in his own body on the tree, which was the sum and complement of his oblation and
that wherein it did chiefly consist; but also his whole humiliation, or state of emptying himself,
whether by yielding voluntary obedience unto the law, as being made under it, that he might be
the end thereof to them that believe, Rom. 10:4, or by his subjection to the curse of the law, in the
antecedent misery and suffering of life, as well as by submitting to death, the death of the cross:
for no action of his as mediator is to be excluded from a concurrence to make up the whole
means in this work. Neither by his intercession do I understand only that heavenly appearance of
his in the most holy place for the applying unto us all good things purchased and procured by his
oblation; but also every act of his exaltation conducing thereunto, from his resurrection to his
"sitting down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, angels, and principalities, and powers,
being made subject unto him." Of all which his resurrection, being the basis, as it were, and the
foundation of the rest ("for if he is not risen, then is our faith in vain," I Cor. 15:13, 14; and then
are we "yet in our sins," verse 17; "of all men most miserable," verse 19), is especially to be
considered, as that to which a great part of the effect is often ascribed; for "he was delivered for
our offences, and was raised again for our justification," Rom. 4:25;–where, and in such other
places, by his resurrection the whole following dispensation and the perpetual intercession of
Christ for us in heaven is intended; for "God raised up his son Jesus to bless us, in turning every
one of us from our iniquities," Acts 3:26.
Now, this whole dispensation, with especial regard to the death and blood-shedding of Christ, is
the means we speak of, agreeably to what was said before of such in general; for it is not a thing
in itself desirable for its own sake. The death of Christ had nothing in it (we speak of his sufferings
distinguished from his obedience) that was good, but only as it conduced to a farther end, even
the end proposed for the manifestation of God’s glorious grace. What good was it, that Herod and
Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and people of Israel, should, with such horrid villany and cruelty,
gather themselves together against God’s holy child, whom he bad anointed? Acts 4:27: or what
good was it, that the Son of God should be made sin and a curse, to be bruised, afflicted, and to
undergo such wrath as the whole frame of nature, as it were, trembled to behold? What good,
what beauty and form is in all this, that it should be desired in itself and for itself? Doubtless none
at all. It must, then, be looked upon as a means conducing to such an end; the glory and lustre
thereof must quite take away all the darkness and confusion that was about the thing itself. And
even so it was intended by the blessed agents in it, by "whose determinate counsel and
foreknowledge he was delivered and slain," Acts 2:23; there being done unto him "whatsoever his
hand and counsel had determined," chap. 4:28: which what it was must be afterward declared.
Now, concerning the whole some things are to be observed:–
That though the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ are distinct acts in themselves and
have distinct immediate products and issues assigned ofttimes unto them (which I should now
have laid down, but that I must take up this in another place), yet they are not in any respect or
regard to be divided or separated, as that the one should have any respect to any persons or any
thing which the other also doth not in its kind equally respect. But there is this manifold union
between them:–
First, In that they are both alike intended for the obtaining and accomplishing the same entire
and complete end proposed,–to wit, the effectual bringing of many sons to glory, for the praise of
God’s grace; of which afterward.
Secondly, That what persons soever the one respecteth, in the good things it obtaineth, the
same, all, and none else, doth the other respect, in applying the good things so obtained; for "he
was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justiflcation," Rom,. 4:25. That is, in
brief, the object of the one is of no larger extent than the object of the other; or, for whom Christ
offered himself, for all those, and only those, doth he intercede, according to his own word, "For
their sake I sanctify myself" (to be an oblation), "that they also might be sanctified through the
truth," John 17:19.
Thirdly, That the oblation of Christ is, as it were, the foundation of his intercession, inasmuch as
by the oblation was procured every thing that, by virtue of his intercession, is bestowed; and that
because the sole end why Christ procured any thing by his death was that it might be applied to
them for whom it was so procured. The sum is, that the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ
are one entire means for the producing of the same effect, the very end of the oblation being that
all those things which are bestowed by the intercession of Christ, and without whose application it
should certainly fail of the end proposed in it, be effected accordingly; so that it cannot be
affirmed that the death or offering of Christ concerned any one person or thing more, in respect of
procuring any good, than his intercession doth for the collating of it: for, interceding there for all
good purchased, and prevailing in all his intercessions (for the Father always hears his Son), it is
evident that every one for whom Christ died must actually have applied unto him all the good
things purchased by his death; which, because it is evidently destructive to the adverse cause,
we must a little stay to confirm it, only telling you the main proof of it lies in our following proposal
of assigning the proper end intended and effected by the death of Christ, so that the chief proof
must be deferred until then. I shall now only propose those reasons which may be handled apart,
not merely depending upon that.

CHAPTER VII
Containing reasons to prove the oblation and intercession of Christ to be one entire means
respecting the accomplishment of the same proposed end, and to have the same personal object.
1. Our first reason is taken from that perpetual union which the Scripture maketh of both these,
almost always joining them together, and so manifesting those things to be most inseparable
which are looked upon as the distinct fruits and effects of them: "By his knowledge shall my
righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities," Isa. 53:11. The actual justification
of sinners, the immediate fruit of his intercession, certainly follows his bearing of their iniquities.
And in the next verse they are of God so put together that surely none ought to presume to put
them asunder: "He bare the sin of many" (behold his oblation!), "and made intercession for the
transgressors;" even for those many transgressors whose sin he bears. And there is one
expression in that chapter, verse 5, which makes it evident that the utmost application of all good
things for which he intercedes is the immediate effect of his passion: "With his stripes we are
healed." Our total hearing is the fruit and procurement of his stripes, or the oblation consummated
thereby. So also, Rom. 4:25, "He was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our
justification." For whose offences he died, for their justification he rose;– and therefore, if he died
for all, all must also be justified, or the Lord failed in his aim and design, both in the death and
resurrection of his Son; which though some have boldly affirmed, yet for my part I cannot but
abhor the owning of so blasphemous a fancy. Rather let us close with that of the apostle,
grounding the assurance of our eternal glory and freedom from all accusations upon the death of
Christ, and that because his intercession also for us does inseparably and necessarily follow it.
"Who," saith he, "shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect?" (It seems also, that it is only
they for whom Christ died.) "It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that
died," (shall none, then, be condemned for whom Christ died? what, then, becomes of the
general ransom?) "yea rather, who is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also
maketh intercession for us," Rom. 8:33, 34. Here is an equal extent of the one and the other;
those persons who are concerned in the one are all of them concerned in the other. That he died
for all and intercedes only for some will scarcely be squared to this text, especially considering
the foundation of all this, which is (verse 32) that love of God which moved him to give up Christ
to death for us all; upon which the apostle infers a kind of impossibility in not giving us all good
things in him; which how it can be reconciled with their opinion who affirm that he gave his Son
for millions to whom lie will give neither grace nor glory, I cannot see. But we rest in that of the
same apostle: "When we were yet without strength, in due time. Christ died for the ungodly;" so
that, "being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him," Rom. 5:6, 9;—
the same between the oblation and intercession of Christ, with their fruits and effects, being
intimated in very many other places.
II. To offer and to intercede, to sacrifice and to pray, are both acts of the same sacerdotal office,
and both required in him who is a priest; so that if he omit either of these, he cannot be a faithful
priest for them: if either he does not offer for them, or not intercede for the success of his oblation
on their behalf, he is wanting in the discharge of his office by him undertaken. Both these we find
conjoined (as before) in Jesus Christ: I John 2: 1, 2, "If any man sin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitiation for our sins." He must be an
advocate to intercede, as well as offer a propitiatory sacrifice, if he will be such a merciful high
priest over the house of God as that the children should be encouraged to go to God by him. This
the apostle exceedingly clears and evidently proves in the Epistle to the Hebrews, describing the
priesthood of Christ, in the execution thereof, to consist in these two acts, of offering up himself in
and by the shedding of his blood, and interceding for us to the utmost; upon the performance of
both which he presseth an exhortation to draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, for he
is "come an high priest of good things to come, not by the blood of goats and calves, but by his
own blood he entered into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us," Heb. 9:11,
12. His bloody oblation gave him entrance into the holy place not made with hands, there to
accomplish the remaining part of his office, the apostle comparing his entrance into heaven for us
with the entrance of the high priest into the holy place, with the blood of bulls and goats upon him,
verses 12, 13 (which, doubtless, was to pray for them in whose behalf he had offered, verse 7);
so presenting himself before his Father that his former oblation might have its efficacy. And hence
he is said to have "an unchangeable priesthood", because he continueth for ever, chap. 7:24; so
being "able to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him, verse 25: wherefore we
have "boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus," chap. 10:19-22. So, then, it is
evident that both these are acts of the same priestly office in Christ: and if he perform either of
them for any, he must of necessity perform the other for them also; for be will not exercise any act
or duty of his priestly function in their behalf for whom he is not a priest: and for whom he is a
priest he must perform both, seeing he is faithful in the discharge of his function to the utmost in
the behalf of the sinners for whom he undertakes. These two, then, oblation and intercession,
must in respect of their objects be of equal extent, and can by, no means be separated. And here,
by the way (the thing being by this argument, in my apprehension, made so clear), I cannot but
demand of those who oppose us about the death of Christ, whether they will sustain that he
intercedeth for all or no;—if not, then they make him but half a priest; if they will, they must be
necessitated either to defend this error, that all shall be saved, or own this blasphemy, that Christ
is not heard of his Father, nor can prevail in his intercession, which yet the saints on earth are
sure to do when they make their supplications according to the will of God, Rom. 8:27; 1 John
5:14. Besides that, of our Saviour it is expressly said that the Father always heareth him, John
11:42; and if that were true when he was yet in the way, in the days of his flesh, and had not
finished the great work be was sent about, how much more then now, when, having done the will
and finished the work of God, he is set down on the right hand of the Majesty on high, desiring
and requesting the accomplishing of the promises that were made unto him upon his undertaking
this work! of which before.
III. The nature of the intercession of Christ will also prove no less than what we assert, requiring
an inseparable conjunction between it and its oblation; for as it is now perfected in heaven, it is
not a humble dejection of himself, with cries, tears, and supplications; nay, it cannot be conceived
to be vocal, by the way of entreaty, but merely real, by the presentation of himself, sprinkled with
the blood of the covenant, before the throne of grace in our behalf. "For Christ," saith the apostle,
"is not entered into the holy places made with hands, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the
presence of God for us," Heb. 9:24. His intercession there is an appearing for us in heaven in the
presence of God, a demonstration of his sacred body, wherein for us he suffered: for (as we said
before) the apostle, in the ninth to the Hebrews, compares his entrance into heaven for us unto
the entrance of the high priest into the holy place, which was with the blood of bulls and goats
upon him, verses 12, 13; our Saviour’s being with his own blood, so presenting himself that his
former oblation might have its perpetual efficacy, until the many sons given unto him are brought
to glory. And herein his intercession consisteth, being nothing, as it were, but his oblation
continued. He was a "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," Rev. 13:8. Now, his
intercession before his actual oblation in the fullness of time being nothing but a presenting of the
engagement that was upon him for the work in due time to be accomplished, certainly that which
follows it is nothing but a presenting of what according to that engagement is fulfilled; so that it is
nothing but a continuation of his oblation in postulating, by remembrance and declaration of it,
those things which by it were procured. How, then is it possible that the one of these should be of
larger compass and extent than the other? Can he be said to offer for them for whom he doth not
intercede, when his intercession is nothing but a presenting of his oblation in the behalf of them
for whom he suffered, and for the bestowing of those good things which by that were purchased.
IV. Again: if the oblation and death of Christ procured and obtained that every good thing should
be bestowed which is actually conferred by the intervening of his intercession, then they have
both of them the same aim, and are both means tending to one and the same end. Now, for the
proof of this supposal, we must remember that which we delivered before concerning the
compact and agreement that was between the Father and the Son, upon his voluntary engaging
of himself unto this great work of redemption; for upon that engagement, the Lord proposed unto
him as the end of his sufferings, and promised unto him as the reward of his labours, the fruit of
his deservings, every thing which be afterward intercedeth for. Many particulars I before
instanced in, and therefore now, to avoid repetition, will wholly omit them, referring the reader to
chapter III for satisfaction: only, I shall demand what is the ground and foundation of our Saviour’s
intercession, understanding it to be by the way of entreaty, either virtual or formal, as it may be
conceived to be either real or oral, for the obtaining of any thing. Must it not rest upon some
promise made unto him? or is there any good bestowed that is not promised? Is it not apparent
that the intercession of Christ doth rest on such a promise as Ps. 2:8, "Ask of me, and I will give
thee the heathen for thine inheritance," etc? Now, upon what consideration was this promise and
engagement made unto our saviour? Was it not for his undergoing of that about which "the kings
set themselves, and the rulers took counsel together against him," verse 2? which the apostles
interpret of Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the people of the Jews, persecuting him to death, and
doing to him "whatsoever the hand and counsel of God had before determined to be done," Acts
4:27, 28. The intercession of Christ, then, being founded on promises made unto him, and these
promises being nothing but an engagement to bestow and actually collate upon them for whom
he suffered all those good things which his death and oblation did merit and purchase, it cannot
be but that he intercedeth for all for whom he died, that his death procured all and every thing
which upon his intercession is bestowed; and until they are bestowed, it hath not its full fruits and
effects. For that which some say, namely, that the death of Christ doth procure that which is
never granted, we shall see afterward whether it do not contradict Scripture, yea, and common
sense.
V. Further: what Christ hath put together let no man presume to put asunder; distinguish
between them they may, but separate them they may not. Now, these things concerning which
we treat (the oblation and intercession of Christ) are by himself conjoined, yea united, John 17;
for there and then he did both offer and intercede. He did then as perfectly offer himself, in
respect of his own will and intention, verse 4, as on the cross; and as perfectly intercede as now
in heaven: who, then, can divide these things, or put them asunder? especially considering that
the Scripture affirmeth that the one of them without the other would have been unprofitable, I Cor.
15:17; for complete remission and redemption could not be obtained for us without the entering of
our high priest into the most holy place, Heb. 9:12.
VI. Lastly, A separating and dividing of the death and intercession of Christ, in respect to the
objects of them, cuts off all that consolation which any soul might hope to attain by an assurance
that Christ died for him. That the doctrine of the general ransom is an uncomfortable doctrine,
cutting all the nerves and sinews of that strong consolation which God is so abundantly willing
that we should receive, shall be afterward declared. For the present, I will only show how it
trencheth upon our comfort in this particular. The main foundation of all the confidence and
assurance whereof in this life we may be made partakers (which amounts to "joy unspeakable,
and full of glory") ariseth from this strict connection of the oblation and intercession of Jesus
Christ;—that by the one he hath procured all good things for us, and by the other he will procure
them to be actually bestowed, whereby be doth never leave our sins, but follows them into every
court, until they be fully pardoned and clearly expiated, Heb. 9: 26. He will never leave us until he
hath saved to the uttermost them that come unto God by him. His death without his resurrection
would have profited us nothing; all our faith in him had been in vain, I Cor. 15:17. So that
separated from it, with the intercession following, either in his own intention or in the several
procurements of the one or the other, it will yield us but little consolation; but in this connection it
is a sure bottom for a soul to build upon, Heb. 7:25. "What good will it do me to be persuaded that
Christ died for my sins, if, notwithstanding that, my sins may appear against me for my
condemnation, where and when Christ will not appear for my justification?" If you will ask, with
the apostle, "Who is he that condemneth?" "It is Christ that died," it may easily be answered,
Rom. 8:34. "Why, God by his law may condemn me, notwithstanding Christ died for me!" Yea, but
saith the apostle, "He is risen again, and sitteth at the right hand of God, making intercession for
us" He rests not in his death, but he will certainly make intercession for them for whom he died:
and this alone gives firm consolation. Our sins dare not appear, nor any of our accusers against
us, where he appeareth for us. Cavilling objections against this text shall be afterward
considered; and so I hope I have sufficiently confirmed and proved what in the beginning of this
chapter I did propose about the identity of the object of the oblation and intercession of Jesus
Christ.

CHAPTER VIII
Objections against the former proposal answered
By what was said in the last chapter, it clearly appears that the oblation and intercession of Christ
are of equal compass and extent in respect of their objects, or the persons for whom he once
offered himself and does continually intercede, and so are to be looked on as one joint means for
the attaining of a certain proposed end; which what it is comes next to be considered. But
because I find some objections laid by some against the former truth, I must remove them before
I proceed; which I shall do "as a man removeth dung until it be all gone."
The sum of one of our former arguments was,—That to sacrifice and intercede belong both to
the same person, as high priest; which name none can answer, neither hath any performed that
office, until both by him be accomplished. Wherefore, our Saviour being the most absolute, and,
indeed, the only true high priest, in whom were really all those perfections which in others
received a weak typical representation, doth perform both these in the behalf of them for whose
sakes he was such.
I. An argument not unlike to this I find by some to be undertaken to be answered, being in these
words proposed, "The ransom and mediation of Christ is no larger than his office of priest,
prophet, and king; but these offices pertain to his church and chosen therefore his ransom
pertains to them only."
The intention and meaning of the argument is the same with what we proposed,—namely, that
Christ offered nothing for them for whom he is no priest, and he is a priest only for them for whom
he does also intercede. If afterward I shall have occasion to make use of this argument, I shall, by
the Lord’s assistance, give more weight and strength to it than it seems to have in their proposal,
whose interest it is to present it as slightly as possible, that they may seem fairly to have waived
it. But the evasion, such as it is, let us look upon.
"This," saith the answerer, "is a sober objection;" which friendly term I imagined at first he had
given for this reason, because he found it kind and easy to be satisfied. But reading the answer
and finding that, so wide from yielding any color or appearance of what was pretended, it only
served him to vent some new, weak, false conceptions, I imagined that it must be some other
kindness that caused him to give this "objection," as he calls it, so much milder an entertainment
than those others, which equally gall him, which hear nothing but, "This is horrid, that blasphemy,
that detestable, abominable, and false," as being, indeed, by those of his persuasion neither to be
endured nor avoided. And at length I conceived that the reason of it was intimated in the first
words of his pretended answer; which are, that "this objection doth not deny the death of Christ
for all men, but only his ransom and mediation for all men." Now, truly, if it be so, I am not of his
judgment, but so far from thinking it a "sober objection," that I cannot be persuaded that any man
in his right wits would once propose it. That Christ should die for all, and yet not be a ransom for
all, himself affirming that he came to "give his life a ransom for many," Matt. 20:28, is to me a
plain contradiction. The death of Christ, in the first most general notion and apprehension thereof,
is a ransom. Nay, do not this answerer and those who are of the same persuasion with him make
the ransom of as large extent as any thing in, or about, or following the death of Christ? Or have
they yet some farther distinction to make, or rather division about the ends of the death of Christ?
as we have had already: "For some he not only paid a ransom, but also intercedeth for them;
which be doth not for all for whom he paid a ransom." Will they now go a step backward, and say
that for some he not only died, but also paid a ransom for them; which he did not for all for whom
he died? Who, then, were those that he thus died for? They must be some beyond all and every
man; for, as they contend, for them he paid a ransom. But let us see what he says farther; in so
easy a cause as this it is a shame to take advantages.
"The answer to this objection," saith be, "is easy and plain in the Scripture, for the mediation of
Christ is both more general and more special;—more general, as he is the ‘one mediator between
God and men,’ I Tim. 2:5; and more special, as he is ‘the mediator of the new testament, that they
which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance’ Heb. 9:15. According to that it is
said, =91He is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe,’ I Tim 4:10. So in all the
offices of Christ, the priest, the prophet, the king, there is that which is more general, and that
which is more special and peculiar."
And this is that which he calls a clear and plain answer from the Scripture, leaving the application
of it unto the argument to other men’s conjecture; which, as far as I can conceive, must be thus:–
-It is true Christ paid a ransom for none but those for whom he is a mediator and priest; but Christ
is to be considered two ways:
First, As a general mediator and priest for all; secondly, As a special mediator and priest for
some. Now, he pays the ransom as a general mediator. This I conceive may be some part of his
meaning; for in itself the whole is in expression so barbarous and remote from common sense,—
in substance such a wild, unchristian madness, as contempt would far better suit it than a reply.
The truth is, for sense and expression in men who, from their manual trades, leap into the office
of preaching and employment of writing, I know no reason why we should expect. Only, it can
never enough be lamented that wildness, in such tattered rags, should find entertainment, whilst
sober truth is shut out of doors; for what, I pray you, is the meaning of this distinction, "Christ is
either a general mediator between God and man, or a special mediator of the new testament?"
Was it ever heard before that Christ was any way a mediator but as he is so of the new
testament? A mediator is not of one; all mediation respects an agreement of several parties; and
every mediator is the mediator of a covenant. Now, if Christ be a mediator more generally than as
he is so of the new covenant, of what covenant, I beseech you, was that? Of the covenant of
works? Would not such an assertion overthrow the whole gospel? Would it not be derogatory to
the honour of Jesus Christ that he should be the mediator of a canceled covenant? Is it not
contrary to Scripture, affirming ‘him a "surety" (not of the first, but) "of a better testament?" Heb.
7:22. Are not such bold assertors fitter to be catechized than to preach? But we must not let it
pass thus. The man harps upon something that he hath heard from some Arminian doctor,
though he hath dad the ill-hap so poorly to make out his conceptions. Wherefore, being in some
measure acquainted with their occasions, which they color with those texts of Scripture which are
here produced, I shall briefly remove the poor shift, that so our former argument may stand
unshaken.
The poverty of the answer, as before expressed, hath been sufficiently already declared. The
fruits of Christ’s mediation have been distinguished by some into those that are more general and
those which are more peculiar, which, in some sense, may be tolerable; but that the offices of
Christ should be said to be either general or peculiar, and himself in relation to them so
considered, is a gross, unshaped fancy. I answer, then, to the thing intended, that we deny any
such general mediation, or function of office in general, in Christ, as should extend itself beyond
his church or chosen. It was his "church" which he "redeemed with his own blood," Acts 20:28;
his "church" that "he loved and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the
washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church," Eph. 5:25-27.
They were his "sheep" he "laid down his life for," John 10:15; and "appeareth in heaven for us,"
Heb. 9:24. Not one word of mediating for any other in the Scripture. Look upon his incarnation. It
was "because the children were partakers of flesh and blood," chap. 2:14; not because all the
world were so. Look upon his oblation: "For their sakes," saith he, ("those whom thou hast given
me,") "do l sanctify myself," John 17:19; that is, to be an oblation, which was the work he had
then in hand. Look upon his resurrection: "He was delivered for our offences, and was raised
again for our justification," Rom. 4:25. Look upon his ascension: "I go," saith he, "to my Father
and your Father, and that to prepare a place for you," John 14:2. Look upon his perpetuated
intercession. Is it not to "save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him?" Heb. 7:25. Not
one word of this general mediation for all. Nay, if you will hear himself, he denies in plain terms to
mediate for all: "I pray not," saith he, "for the world, but for them which then hast given me," John
17:9.
But let us see what is brought to confirm this distinction. I Tim. 2: 5 is quoted for the maintenance
thereof: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
What then, I pray? what will be concluded hence? Cannot Christ be a mediator between God and
men, but he must be a mediator for all men? Are not the elect men? do not the children partake of
flesh and blood? doth not his church consist of men? What reason is there to assert, out of an
indefinite proposition, a universal conclusion? Because Christ was a mediator for men (which
were true had he been so only for his apostles), shall we conclude therefore he was so for all
men? "Apage nugas!" But let us see another proof, which haply may give more strength to the
uncouth distinction we oppose, and that is I Tim. 4:10, "Who is the Savi our of all men, specially of
those that believe." Had it been, "Who is the Mediator of all men, specially of them that believe," it
had been more likely. But the consciences, or at least the foreheads of these men! Is there any
word here spoken of Christ as mediator? Is it not the "living God" in whom we trust that is the
Saviour here mentioned, as the words going before in the same verse are? And is Christ called
so in respect of his mediation? That God the Father is often called Saviour I showed before, and
that he is here intended, as is agreed upon by all sound interpreters, so also it is clear from the
matter in hand, which is the protecting providence of God, general towards all, special and
peculiar towards his church. Thus he is said to "save man and beast," Ps. 36:6, rendering the
Hebrew, Yasha, by the Greek, Soter, "Thou shalt save or preserve." It is God, then, that is here
called the "Saviour of all," by deliverance and protection in danger, of which the apostle treats,
and that by his providence, which is peculiar towards believers; and what this makes for a
universal mediation I know not.
Now, the very context in this place will not admit of any other interpretation; for the words render
a reason why, notwithstanding all the injury and reproaches wherewith the people of God are
continually assaulted, yet they should cheerfully go forward to run with joy the race that is set
before them; even because as God preserveth all (for "in him we live, and move, and have our
being," Acts 17:28; Ps. 145:14-16), so that he will not suffer any to be injured and unrevenged,
Gen. 9:5, so is he especially the preserver of them that do believe; for they are as the apple of his
eye, Zech. 2:8; Dent. 32:10. So that if he should suffer them to be pressed for a season, yet let
them not let go their hope and confidence, nor be weary of well-doing, but still rest on and trust in
him. This encouragement being that which the apostle was to lay down, what motive would it be
hereunto to tell believers that God would have those saved who neither do nor ever will or shall
believe?—that I say nothing how strange it seems that Christ should be the Saviour of them who
are never saved, to whom he never gives grace to believe, for whom be denies to intercede, John
17:9; which yet is no small part of his mediation whereby he saves sinners. Neither the subject,
then, nor the predicate proposition, "He is the Saviour of all men," is rightly apprehended by them
who would wrest it to the maintenance of universal redemption. For the subject, "He," it is God
the Father, and not Christ the mediator; and for the predicate, it is a providential preservation, and
not a purchased salvation that is intimated;—that is, the providence of God protecting and
governing all. but watching in an especial manner for the good of them that are his, that they be
not always unjustly and cruelly traduced and reviled, with other pressures, that the apostle here
rests upon; as also he shows that it was his course to do, 2 Cor. 1:9,10: "But we had the
sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the
dead: who delivered us from so great a death, and doth deliver us: in whom we trust that he will
yet deliver us;" for "he is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." If any shall
conceive that these words ("Because we hope in the living God, who is," etc.) do not render an
account of the ground of Paul’s confidence in going through with his labours and afflictions, but
rather are an expression of the head and sum of that doctrine for which he was so turmoiled and
afflicted, I will not much oppose it; for then, also, it includes nothing but an assertion of the true
God and dependence on him, in opposition to all the idols of the Gentiles, and other vain conceits
whereby they exalted themselves into the throne of the Most High. But that Christ should be said
to be a Saviour of,—I. Those who are never saved from their sins, as he saves his people, Matt.
1:21;— 2. Of those who never hear one word of saving or a Saviour; —3. That he should be a
Savio wofold sense,–(1.) For all, (2.) For believers;—4. That to believe is the condition whereby
Christ becomes a Saviour in an especial manner unto any, and that condition not procured nor
purchased by him;- -that this, I say, is the sense of this place, "credat Judaeus Apella:" To me
nothing is more certain than that to whom Christ is in any sense a Saviour in the work of
redemption, he saves them to the uttermost from all their sins of infidelity and disobedience, with
the saving of grace here and glory hereafter.
II. Farther attempts, also, there are to give strength to this evasion, and so to invalidate our
former argument, which I must also remove.
"Christ," say they, (More’s universality of Grace) "in some sort intercedeth and putteth in for
transgressors, even the sons of men, yet in and of the world, that the Spirit may so still unite and
bless those that believe on him, and so go forth in their confessions and conversations, and in the
ministration of the gospel by his servants, that those among whom they dwell and converse might
be convinced and brought to believe the report of the gospel, Isa. 53:12; as once, Luke 23:34; as
himself left a pattern to us, John 27:21-23; that so the men of the world might be convinced, and
the convinced allured to Christ and to God in him, Matt. 5:14-16; yea, so as that he doth in some
measure enlighten every man that cometh into the world, John 1:9. But in a more special manner
doth he intercede," etc.
Here is a twofold intercession of Christ as mediator:–I. For all sinners, that they may believe (for
that is it which is intended by the many cloudy expressions wherein it is involved). 2. For
believers, that they may be saved. It is the first member of the distinction which we oppose; and
therefore must insist a little upon it.
First, Our author saith, "It is an interceding in some sort." I ask, in what sort? Is it directly, or
indirectly? Is it by virtue of his blood shed for them, or otherwise? Is it with an intention and desire
to obtain for them the good things interceded for, or with purpose that they shall go without them?
Is it for all and every man, or only for those who live in the outward pale of the church? Is faith the
thing required for them, or something else? Is that desired absolutely, or upon some condition?
All which queries must be clearly answered before this general intercession can be made
intelligible.
First, Whether it be directly or indirectly, and by consequence only, that this intercession after a
sort is used, for that thing interceded for is represented not as the immediate issue or aim of the
prayer of Christ, but as a reflex arising from a blessing obtained by others; for the prayer set
down is that God would so bless believers, that those amongst whom they dwell may believe the
report of the gospel. It is believers that are the direct object of this intercession, and others are
only glanced at through them. The good also so desired for them is considered either as an
accident that may come to pass, or follow the flourishing of believers, or as an end intended to be
accomplished by it. If the first, then their good is no more intended than their evil. If the latter, why
is it not effected? why is not the intention of our Saviour accomplished? Is it for want of wisdom to
choose suitable and proportionable means to the end proposed? or is it for want of power to
effect what he intendeth?
Secondly, Is it by virtue of his blood shed for them, or otherwise? – If it be, then Christ intercedeth
for them that they may enjoy those things which for them by his oblation he did procure; for this it
is to make his death and blood-shedding to be the foundation of his intercession; then it follows
that Christ by his death procured faith for all, because he intercedeth that all may believe,
grounding that intercession upon the merit of his death. But, first, this is more than the assertors
of universal redemption will sustain; among all the ends of the death of Christ by them assigned,
the effectual and infallible bestowing of faith on those for whom he died is none: secondly, if by
his death he hath purchased it for all, and by intercession entreateth for it, why is it not actually
bestowed on them? is not a concurrence of both these sufficient for the making out of that one
spiritual blessing?–But, secondly, If it be not founded on his death and blood-shedding, then we
desire that they would describe unto us this intercession of Christ, differing from his appearing for
us in heaven sprinkled with his own blood.
Thirdly, Doth he intercede for them that they should believe, with an intention or desire that they
should do so, or no? If not, it is but a mock intercession, and an entreaty for that which he would
not have granted. If so, why is it not accomplished? why do not all believe? Yea, if he died for all,
and prayed for all, that they might believe, why are not all saved? for Christ is always heard of his
Father, John 11:42.
Fourthly, Is it for all and every one in the world that Christ makes this intercession, or only for
those who live within the pale of the church? If only for these latter, then this doth not prove a
general intercession for all, but only one more large than that for believers; for if he leaves out
any one in the world, the present hypothesis falls to the ground. If for all, how can it consist in that
petition, "that the Spirit would so lead, guide, and bless believers, and so go forth in the
ministration of the gospel by his servants, that others (that is, all and every one in the world) may
be convinced and brought to believe?" How, l say, can this be spoken with any reference to those
millions of souls that never see a believer, that hear no report of the gospel?
Fifthly, If his intercession be for faith, then either Christ intercedeth for it absolutely, that they may
certainly have it, or upon condition, and that either on the part of God or man.—If absolutely, then
all do actually believe; or that is not true, the Father always bears him, John 11:42. If upon
condition on the part of God, it can be nothing but this, if he will or please. Now, the adding of this
condition may denote in our Saviour two things:—I. A nescience of what is, his Father’s will in the
thing interceded for: which, first, cannot stand with the unity of his person as now in glory; and,
secondly, cannot be, because he hath the assurance of a promise to be heard in whatever he
asketh, Ps. 2:8. Or, 2. An advancement of his Father’s will, by submission to that as the prime
cause of the good to be bestowed; which may well stand with absolute intercession, by virtue
whereof all must believe.—Secondly, Is it a condition on the part of those for whom he doth
intercede? Now, I beseech you, what condition is that? where in the Scripture assigned? where is
it said that Christ doth intercede for men that they may have faith if they do such and such things?
Nay, what condition can rationally be assigned of this desire? "Some often intimate that it is, if
they suffer the Spirit to have his work upon their hearts, and obey the grace of God." Now, what is
it to obey the grace of God? Is it not to believe? Therefore, it seems that Christ intercedeth for
them that they may believe, upon condition that they do believe. Others, more cautiously, assert
the good using of the means of grace that they do enjoy to be the condition upon which the
benefit of this intercession doth depend. But again,—I. What is the good using of the means of
grace but submitting to them, that is, believing? and so we are as before. 2. All have not the
means of grace, to use well or ill. 3. Christ prays that they may use the means of grace well, or he
doth not. If not, then how can he pray that they may believe, seeing to use well the means of
grace, by yielding obedience unto them, is indeed to believe? If he do, then he doth it absolutely,
or upon condition, and so the argument is renewed again as in the entrance. Many more reasons
might be easily produced to show the madness of this assertion, but those may suffice. Only we
must look upon the proof and confirmations of it.
First, then, the words of the prophet Isaiah, chap. 53:12, "He made intercession for the
transgressors," are insisted on.—Ans. The transgressors here, for whom our Saviour is said to
make intercession, are either all the transgressors for whom he suffered, as is most likely from
the description we have of them, verse 6, or the transgressors only by whom he suffered, that
acted in his sufferings, as some suppose. If the first, then this place proves that Christ intercedes
for all those for whom be suffered; which differs not from that which we contend for. If the latter,
then we may consider it as accomplished. How he then did it, so it is here foretold that he should,
which is the next place urged, namely,—
Luke 23:34, "Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do"—Ans. The
conclusion which from these words is inferred being, "Therefore there is a general intercession
for all, that they may believe," I might well leave the whole argument to the silent judgment of
men, without any farther opening and discovery of its invalidity and weakness; but because the
ablest of that side have usually insisted much on this place for a general successless
intercession, I will a little consider the inference its dependence on these words of the gospel, and
search whether it have any appearance of strength in it. To which end we must observe,—
Secondly, That this prayer is not for all men, but only for that handful of the Jews by whom be
was crucified. Now, from a prayer for them to infer a prayer for all and every man that ever were,
are, or shall be, is a wild deduction.
It doth not appear that he prayed for all his crucifers neither, but only for those who did it out of
ignorance, as appears by the reason annexed to his supplication: "For they know not what they
do." And though, Acts 3:17, it is said that the rulers also did it ignorantly, yet that all of them did
so is not apparent; that some did is certain from that place; and so it is that some of them were
converted, as afterward. Indefinite propositions must not in such things be made universal. Now,
doth it follow that because Christ prayed for the pardon of their sins who crucified him out of
ignorance, as some of them did, that therefore he intercedeth for all that they may believe;
crucifers who never once heard of his crucifying?
Thirdly, Christ in those words doth not so much as pray for those men that they might believe, but
only that that sin of them in crucifying of him might be forgiven, not laid to their charge. Hence to
conclude, therefore he intercedeth for all men that they may believe, even because he prayed
that the sin of crucifying himself might be forgiven them that did it, is a strange inference.
Fourthly, There is another evident limitation in the business; for among his crucifiers he prays
only for them that were present at his death, amongst whom, doubtless, many came more out of
curiosity, to see and observe, as is usual in such cases, than out of malice and despite. So that
whereas some urge that notwithstanding this prayer, yet the chief of the priests continued in their
unbelief, it is not to the purpose, for it cannot be proved that they were present at his crucifying.
Fifthly, It cannot be affirmed with any probability that our Saviour should pray for all and every
one of them, supposing some of them to be finally impenitent: for he himself knew full well "what
was in man," John 2:25; yea, he "knew from the beginning who they were that believed not,"
chap. 6:64. Now, it is contrary to the rule which we have, 1 John 5:16, "There is a sin unto death,"
etc., to pray for them whom we know to be finally impenitent, and to sin unto death.
Sixthly, It seems to me that this supplication was effectual and successful, that the Son was
heard in this request also, faith and forgiveness being granted to them for whom he prayed; so
that this makes nothing for a general, ineffectual intercession, it being both special and effectual:
for, Acts 3., of them whom Peter tells, that they "denied the Holy One, and desired a murderer,"
verse 14, "and killed the Prince of Life," verse 15,—of these, I say, five thousand believed: chap.
:44, "Many of them which heard the word believed, and the number of them was about five
thousand." And if any others were among them whom our Saviour prayed for, they might be
converted afterward. Neither were the rulers without the compass of the fruits of this prayer; for "a
great company of the priests were obedient to the faith," chap. 6:7. So that nothing can possibly
be hence inferred for the purpose intended.
Seventhly, We may, nay we must, grant a twofold praying in our Saviour-one, by virtue of his
office as he was mediator; the other, in answer of his duty, as he was subject to the law. It is true,
he who was mediator was made subject to the law; but yet those things which be did in
obedience to the law as a private person were not acts of mediation, nor works of him as
mediator, though of him who was mediator. Now, as he, was subject to the law, our Saviour was
bound to forgive offences and wrongs done unto him, and to pray for his enemies; as also he had
taught us to do, whereof in this he gave us an example: Matt. 5:44, "I say unto you, Love your
enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you, and persecute you;" which doubtless he inferreth from that law, Lev. 19:18,
"Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself,"-quite contrary to the wicked gloss put upon it by the Pharisees.
And in this sense our Saviour here, as a private person, to whom revenge was forbidden, pardon
enjoined, prayer commanded, prays for his very enemies and crucifers; which doth not at all
concern his interceding for us as mediator, wherein he was always heard, and so is nothing to the
purpose in hand.
Again, John 17:21-23 is urged to confirm this general intercession, which we have exploded; our
Saviour praying that, by the unity, concord, and flourishing of his servants, the world might
believe and know that God had sent him. From which words, though some make a seeming
flourish, yet the thing pretended is no way confirmed; for,—
First, If Christ really intended and desired that the whole world, or all men in the world, should
believe, he would also, no doubt, have prayed for more effectual means of grace to be granted
unto them than only a beholding of the blessed condition of his (which yet is granted only to a
small part of the world); at least for the preaching of the word to them all that by it, as the only
ordinary way, they might come to the knowledge of him. But this we do not find that ever he
prayed for, or that God hath granted it; nay, he blessed his Father that so it was not, because so
it seemed good in his sight, Matt. 11:25, 26.
Secondly, Such a gloss or interpretation must not be put upon the place as should run cross to
the express words of our Saviour, verse 9, "I pray not for the world;" for if he here prayed that the
world should have true, holy, saving faith, he prayed for as great a blessing and privilege for the
world as any he procured or interceded for his own. Wherefore,—
Thirdly, Say some, the world is here taken for the world of the elect, the world to be saved,—
God’s people throughout the world. Certain it is that the world is not here taken properly pro
mundo continente, for the world containing, but figuratively pro mundo contento, for the world
contained, or men in the world. Neither can it be made appear that it must be taken universally,
for all the men in the world, as seldom it is in the Scripture, which afterward we shall make
appear; but it may be understood indefinitely, for men in the world, few or more, as the elect are
in their several generations. But this exposition, though it hath great authors I cannot absolutely
adhere unto, because through this whole chapter the world is taken either for the world of
reprobates, opposed to them that are given to Christ by his Father, or for the world of unbelievers
(the same men under another notion), opposed to them who are committed to his Father by
Christ Wherefore I answer,—
Fourthly, That by believing, verse 21, and knowing, verse 23, is not meant believing in a strict
sense, or a saving comprehension and receiving of Jesus Christ, and so becoming the sons of
God,—which neither ever was, nor ever will be, fulfilled in every man in the world, nor was ever
prayed for,—but a conviction and acknowledgment that the Lord Christ is not, what before they
had taken him to be, a seducer and a false prophet, but indeed what he said, one that came out
from God, able to protect and do good for and to his own: which kind of conviction and
acknowledgment that it is often termed believing in the Scripture is more evident than that it
should need to be proved; and that this is here meant the evidence of the thing is such as that it
is consented unto by expositors of all sorts. Now, this is not for any good of the world, but for the
vindication of his people and the exaltation of his own glory; and so proves not at all the thing in
question. But of this word "world" afterward.
The following place of Matthew, chap. 5:15, 16 (containing some instructions given by our
Saviour to his apostles, so to improve the knowledge and light which of him they had, and were
farther to receive, in the preaching of the word and holiness of life, that they might be a means to
draw men to glorify God) is certainly brought in to make up a show of a number, as very many
other places are, the author not once considering what is to be proved by them, nor to what end
they are used; and therefore without farther inquiry may well be laid aside, as not it all belonging
to the business in hand, nor to be dragged within many leagues of the conclusion, by all the
strength and skill of Mr More.
Neither is that other place of John, chap. 1:9, any thing more advisedly or seasonably urged,
though wretchedly glossed, and rendered, "In some measure enlightening every one that comes
into the world." The Scripture says that "Christ is the true Light, that lighteth every man that
cometh into the world;" In some measure," says Mr More. Now, I beseech you, in what measure
is this? How far, unto what degree, in what measure, is illumination from Christ? by whom or by
what means, separated from him, independent of him, is the rest made up? who supplies the
defect of Christ? I know your aim is to hug in your illumination by the light of nature, and I know
not what common helps that you dream of, towards them who are utterly deprived of all gospel
means of grace, and that not only for the knowledge of God as Creator, but also of him as in
Christ the Redeemer: but whether the calves of your own setting up should be thus sacrificed
unto, with wresting and perverting the word of God, and undervaluing of the grace of Christ, you
will one day, I hope, be convinced. It sufficeth us that Christ is said to enlighten every one,
because he is the only true light, and every one that is enlightened receiveth his light from him,
who is the sum, the fountain thereof. And so the general defence of this general, ineffectual
intercession is vanished. But yet farther, it is particularly replied, concerning the priesthood of
Christ, that,—
III. "As a priest in respect of one end, he offered sacrifice,—that is, propitiation for all men, Heb.
2:9, 9:26; John 1:29; 1 John 2:2; -in respect of all the ends, propitiation, and sealing the new
testament, and testification to the truth;–and of the uttermost end in all, for his called and chosen
ones, Heb. 9:14, 15; Matt. 26:28." (What follows after, being repeated out of another place, hath
been already answered.)
Ans. First, These words, as here placed, have no tolerable sense in them, neither is it an easy
thing to gather the mind of the author out of them, so far are they from being a clear answer to the
argument, as was pretended. Words of Scripture, indeed, are used, but wrested and corrupted,
not only to the countenance of error, but to bear a part in unreasonable expressions. For what, I
pray, is the meaning of these words: "He offered sacrifice in respect of one end, then of all ends,
then of the uttermost end in all?" To inquire backwards:—I. What is this "uttermost end in all?" Is
that "in all," in or among all the ends proposed and accomplished? or in all those for whom he
offered sacrifice? or is it the uttermost end and proposal of God and Christ in his oblation? If this
latter, that is the glory of God; now there is no such thing once intimated in the places of Scripture
quoted, Heb. 9:14, 15; Matt. 26:28. 2. Do those places hold out the uttermost end of the death of
Christ (subordinate to God’s glory)? Why, in one of them it is the obtaining of redemption, and in
the other the shedding of his blood for the remission of sins is expressed! Now, all this you affirm
to be the first end of the death of Christ, in the first words used in this place calling it
"propitiation,"—that is, an atonement for the remission of sins; which remission of sins and
redemption are for the substance one and the same, both of them the immediate fruits and first
end of the death of Christ, as is apparent, Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14. So here you have confounded the
first and last end of the death of Christ, spoiling, indeed, and casting down (as you may lawfully
do, for it is your own), the whole frame and building, whose foundation is this, that there be
several and diverse ends of the death of Christ towards several persons, so that some of them
belong unto all, and all of them only to some; which is the "protos pseudos" of the whole book. 3.
Christ’s offering himself to put away sin, out of Heb. 9:26, [you make to be] the place for the first
end of the death of Christ, and his sledding of his blood for the remission of sins, from Matt. 26:8,
to be the last! Pray, when you write next, give us the difference between these two. 4. You say,
"He offered sacrifice in respect of one end,- -that is, propitiation for all men." Now, truly, if ye
know the meaning of sacrifice and propitiation, this will scarce appear sense unto you upon a
second view.
But, [secondly,] to leave your words and take your meaning, it seems to be this, in respect of one
end that Christ proposed to himself in his sacrifice, he is a priest for all, be aimed to attain and
accomplish it for them; but in respect of other ends, he is so only for his chosen and called. Now,
truly, this is an easy kind of answering, which, if it will pass for good and warrantable, you may
easily disappoint all your adversaries, even first by laying down their arguments, then saying your
own opinion is otherwise; for the very thing that is here imposed on us for an answer is the the
chief matter in debate. We absolutely deny that the several ends of the death of Christ, or the
good things procured by his death, are thus distributed as is here pretended. To prove our
assertion, and to give a reason of our denial of this dividing of these things in respect of their
objects, we produce the argument above proposed concerning the priesthood of Christ; to which
the answer given is a bare repetition of the thing in question.
But you will say divers places of Scripture are quoted for the confirmation of this answer. But
these, as I told you before, are brought forth for pomp and show, nothing at all being to be found
in them to the business in hand; such are Heb. 9:26; John 1:29. For what consequence is there
from an affirmation indefinite, that Christ bare or took away sin, to this, that he is a priest for all
and every one in respect of propitiation? Besides, in that of John 1:9 there is a manifest allusion
to the paschal lamb, by which there was a typical, ceremonial purification and cleansing of sin;
which was proper only to the people of Israel, the type of the elect of God, and not of all in the
world, of all sorts, reprobates and unbelievers also. Those other two Places of Heb. 2:9, 1 John
2:2, shall be considered apart, because they seem to have some strength for the main of the
cause; though apparently there is no word in them that can be wrested to give the least color to
such an uncouth distinction as that which we oppose. And thus our argument from the equal
objective extent of the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ is confirmed and vindicated, and,
withal, the means used by the blessed Trinity for the accomplishment of the proposed end
unfolded; which end, what it was, is next to be considered.

BOOK II

Some previous considerations to a more particular inquiry after the proper end and effect of the
death of Christ.
The main thing upon which the whole controversy about the death of Christ turneth, and upon
which the greatest weight of the business dependeth, comes next to our consideration, being that
which we have prepared the way unto by all that hath been already said. It is about the proper
end of the death of Christ; which whoso can rightly constitute and make manifest may well be
admitted for a day’s-man and umpire in the whole contestation: for if it be the end of Christ’s
death which most of our adversaries assign, we will not deny but that Christ died for all and every
one; and if that be the end of it which we maintain so to be, they will not extend it beyond the
elect, beyond believers. This, then, must be fully cleared and solidly confirmed by them who hope
for any success in their undertakings. The end of the death of Christ we asserted, in the
beginning of our discourse, to be our approximation or drawing nigh unto God; that being a
general expression for the whole reduction and recovery of sinners from the state of alienation,
misery, and wrath, into grace, peace, and eternal communion with him. Now, there being a
twofold end in things, one of the worker, the other of the work wrought, we have manifested how
that, unless it be either for want of wisdom and certitude of mind in the agent, in choosing and
using unsuitable means for the attaining of the end proposed, or for want of skill and power to
make use of and rightly to improve well proportioned means to the best advantage, these things
are always coincident; the work effecteth what the workman intendeth. In the business in hand,
the agent is the blessed Three in One, as was before declared; and the means whereby they
collimed and aimed at the end proposed were the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ,
which are united, intending the same object, as was also cleared. Now, unless we will
blasphemously ascribe want of wisdom, power, perfection, and sufficiency in working unto the
agent, or affirm that the death and intercession of Christ were not suitable and proportioned for
the attaining the end proposed by it to be effected, we must grant that the end of these is one and
the same. Whatsoever the blessed Trinity intended by them, that was effected; and whatsoever
we find in the issue ascribed unto thein, that by them the blessed Trinity intended. So that we
shall have no cause to consider these apart, unless it be sometimes to argue from the one to the
other; — as, where we find any thing ascribed to the death of Christ, as the fruit thereof, we may
conclude that that God intended to effect by it; and so also on the contrary.
Now, the end of the death of Christ is either supreme and ultimate, or intermediate and
subservient to that last end.
1. The first is the glory of God, or the manifestation of his glorious attributes, especially of his
justice, and mercy tempered with justice, unto us. The Lord doth necessarily aim at himself in the
first place, as the chiefest good, yea, indeed, that alone which is good; that is, absolutely and
simply so, and not by virtue of communication from another: and therefore in all his works,
especially in this which we have in hand, the chiefest of all, he first intends the manifestation of
his own glory; which also he fully accomplisheth in the close, to every point and degree by him
intended. He "maketh all things for himself," Prov. xvi. 4; and every thing in the end must
"redound to the glory of God," 2 Cor. iv. 15; wherein Christ himself is said to be "God’s," 1 Cor. iii.
23, serving to his glory in that whole administration that was committed to him. So, Eph. i. 6, the
whole end of all this dispensation, both of choosing us from eternity, redeeming us by Christ,
blessing us with all spiritual blessings in him, is affirmed to be "the praise of the glory of his
grace;" and, verse 12, "That we should be to the praise of his glory." This is the end of all the
benefits we receive by the death of Christ; for "we are filled with the fruits of righteousness, which
are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God," Phil. i. 11; — which also is fully asserted,
chap. ii. 11, "That every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father." This the apostle fully clears in the ninth to the Romans, where he so asserts the supreme
dominion and independency of God in all his actions, his absolute freedom from taking rise,
cause, or occasion to his purposes, from any thing among us sons of men, doing all things for his
own sake, and aiming only at his own glory. And this is that which in’ the close of all shall be
accomplished, when every creature shall say, "Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be
unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever," Rev. v. 13.
2. There is an end of the death of Christ which is intermediate and subservient to that other,
which is the last and most supreme, even the sects which it hath in respect of us, and that is it of
which we now treat; which, as we before affirmed, is the bringing of us unto God. Now, this,
though in reference to the oblation and intercession of Christ it be one entire end, yet in itself, and
in respect of the relation which the several acts therein have one to another, may be considered
distinctly in two parts, whereof one is the end and the other the means for the attaining of that
end; both the complete end of the mediation of Christ in respect of us. The ground and cause of
this is the appointment of the Lord that there should be such a connection and coherence
between the things purchased for us by Jesus Christ, that the one should be a means and way of
attaining the other,– the one the condition, and the other the thing promised upon that condition,
but hath equally and alike procured for us by Jesus Christ; for if either be omitted in his purchase,
the other would be vain and fruitless, as we shall afterward declare. Now, both these consist in a
communication of God and his goodness unto us (and our participation of him by virtue thereof);
and that either to grace or glory, holiness or blessedness, faith or salvation. In this last way they
are usually called, faith being the means of which we speak, and salvation the end; faith the
condition, salvation the promised inheritance. Under the name of faith we comprise all saving
grace that accompanies it; and under the name of salvation, the whole " glory to be revealed," the
liberty of the glory of the children of God, Rom. viii., 18, 21,– all that blessedness which
consisteth in an eternal fruition of the blessed God. With faith go all the effectual means thereof,
both external and internal; — the word and almighty sanctifying Spirit; all advancement of state
and condition attending it, as justification, reconciliation, and adoption into the family of God; all
fruits flowing from it in sanctification and universal holiness; with all other privileges and
enjoyments of believers here, which follow the redemption and reconciliation purchased for them
by the oblation of Christ. A real, effectual, and infallible bestowing and applying of all these
things,– as well those that are the means as those that are the end, the condition as the thing
conditioned about, faith and grace as salvation and glory,– unto all and every one for whom he
died, do we maintain to be the end proposed and effected by the blood-shedding of Jesus Christ,
with those other acts of his mediatorship which we before declared to be therewith inseparably
conjoined: so that every one for whom he died and offered up himself hath, by virtue of his death
or oblation, a right purchased for him unto all these things, which in due time he shall certainly
and infallibly enjoy; or (which is all one), the end of Christ’s obtaining grace and glory with his
Father was, that they might be certainly bestowed upon all those for whom he died, some of them
upon condition that they do believe, but faith itself absolutely upon no condition at all. All which
we shall farther illustrate and confirm, after we have removed some false ends assigned.l

CHAPTER II.
Containing a removal of some mistakes and false assignations of the end of the death of Christ.
THAT the death, oblation, and blood-shedding of Jesus Christ is to be considered as the means
for the compassing of an appointed end was before abundantly declared; and that such a means
as is not in itself any way desirable but for the attaining of that end. Now, because that which is
the end of any thing must also be good, for unless it be so it cannot be an end (for bonumet finis
convertuntur), it must be either his Father’s good, or his own good, or our good, which was the
end proposed.
I. That it was not merely his own is exceedingly apparent. For in his divine nature he was
eternally and essentially partaker of all that glory which is proper to the Deity; which though in
respect of us it be capable of more or less manifestation, yet in itself it is always alike eternally
and absolutely perfect. And in this regard, at the close of all, he desires and requests no other
glory but that which he had with his Father "before the world was," John xvii. 5. And in respect of
his human nature, as he was eternally predestinated, without any foresight of doing or suffering,
to be personally united, from the instant of his conception, with the second person of the Trinity,
so neither while he was in the way did he merit any thing for himself by his death and oblation. He
needed not to suffer for himself, being perfectly and legally righteous; and the glory that he aimed
at, by "enduring the cross, and despising the shame," was not so much his own, in respect of
possession, by the exaltation of his own nature, as the bringing of many children to glory, even as
it was in the promise set before him, as we before at large declared. His own exaltation, indeed,
and power over all flesh, and his appointment to be Judge of the quick and the dead, was a
consequent of his deep humiliation and suffering; but that it was the effect and product of it,
procured meritoriously by it, that it was the end aimed at by him in his making satisfaction for sin,
that we deny. Christ hath a power and dominion over all, but the foundation of this dominion is not
in his death for all; for he hath dominion over all things, being appointed " heir of them, and
upholding them all by the word of his power," Heb. i. 2, 3. "He is set over the works of God’s
hands, and all things are put in subjection under him," chap. ii. 7, 8. And what are those "all
things," or what are amongst them, you may see in the place of the psalmist from whence the
apostle citeth these words, Ps. viii. 5 — 8. And did he die for all these things? Nay, hath he not
power over the angels? are not principalities and powers made subject to him? Shall he not at the
last day judge the angels? for with him the saints shall do it, by giving attestation to his righteous
judgments, l. Cor. vi. 2, 3; — and yet, is it not expressly said that the angels have no share in the
whole dispensation of God manifested in the flesh, so as to die for them to redeem them from
their sins? of which some had no need, and the others are eternally excluded: Heb. ii. 16, "He
took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham," God setting him
"king upon his holy hill of Zion," in despite of his enemies, to bruise them and to rule them "with a
rod of iron," Ps. ii. 6, 9, is not the immediate effect of his death for them, but rather all things are
given into his hand out of the immediate love of the Father to his Son, John iii. 35; Matt. xi. 27.
That is the foundation of all this sovereignty and dominion over all creatures, with this power of
judging that is put into his hand.
Besides, be it granted (which cannot be proved) that Christ by his death did precure this power of
judging, would any thing hence follow that might be beneficial to the proving of the general
ransom for all? No, doubtless; this dominion and power of judging is a power of condemning as
well as saving; it is "all judgment" that is committed to him, John v. 22. "He hath authority given
unto him to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man;" that is, at that hour " when all that
are in their graves shall hear his voice and come forth; they that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation," verses 27 -
- 29; 2 Cor. v. 10. Now, can it be reasonably asserted that Christ died for men to redeem them,
that he might have power to condemn? Nay, do not these two overthrow one another? If he
redeemed thee by his death, then he did not aim at the obtaining of any power to condemn thee;
if he did the latter, then that former was not in his intention.
II. Nor, secondly, was it his Father’s good. I speak now of the proximate and immediate end and
product of the death of Christ, not of the ultimate and remote, knowing that the supreme end of
Christ’s oblation, and all the benefits purchased and procured by it, was "the praise of his glorious
grace;" but for this other, it doth not directly tend to the obtaining of any thing unto God, but of all
good things from God to us. Arminius, with his followers, with the other Universalists of our days,
affirm this to be the end proposed, that God might, his justice being satisfied, save sinners, the
hinderance being removed by the satisfaction of Christ. He had by his death obtained a right and
liberty of pardoning sin upon what condition he pleased: so that, after the satisfaction of Christ
yielded and considered, "integrum Deo fuit" (as his words are), it was wholly in God’s free
disposal whether he would eave any or no; and upon what condition he would, whether of faith or
of works "God," say they, "had a good mind and will to do good to human kind, but could not by
reason of sin, his justice lying in the way; whereupon he sent Christ to remove that obstacle, that
so he might, upon the prescribing of what condition he pleased, and its being by them fulfilled,
have mercy on them," Now, because in this they place the chief, if not the sole, end of the
oblation of Christ, I must a little show the falseness and folly of it; which may be done plainly by
these following reasons: –
First, The foundation of this whole assertion seems to me to be false and erroneous,– namely,
that God could not have mercy on mankind unless satisfaction were made by his Son. It is true,
indeed, supposing the decree, purpose, and constitution of God that so it should be, that so he
would manifest his glory, by the way of vindicative justice, it was impossible that it should
otherwise be; for with the Lord there is "no variableness, neither shadow of turning," James i. 17;
1 Sam. xv. 29: but to assert positively, that absolutely and antecedently to his constitution he
could not have done it, is to me an unwritten tradition, the Scripture affirming no such thing,
neither can it be gathered from thence in any good consequence. If any one shall deny this, we
will try what the Lord will enable us to say unto it, and in the meantime rest contented in that of
Augustine: "Though other ways of saving us were not wanting to his infinite wisdom, yet certainly
the way which he did proceed in was the most convenient, because we find he proceeded
therein."
Secondly, This would make the cause of sending his Son to die to be a common love, or rather
wishing that, he might do good or show mercy to all, and not an entire act of his will or purpose, of
knowing, redeeming, and saving his elect; which we shall afterward disprove.
Thirdly, If the end of the death of Christ were to acquire a right to his Father, that notwithstanding
his justice he might save sinners, then did he rather die to redeem a liberty unto God than a
liberty from evil unto us,– that his Father might be enlarged from that estate wherein it was
impossible for him to do that which he desired, and which his nature inclined him to, and not that
we might be freed frown that condition wherein, without this freedom purchased, it could not be
but we must perish. If this be so, I see no reason why Christ should be said to come and redeem
his people from their sins; but rather, plainly, to purchase this right and liberty for his Father. Now,
where is there any such assertion, wherein is any thing of this nature in the Scripture? Doth the
Lord say that he sent his Son out of love to himself, or unto us? Is God or are men made the
immediate subject of good attained unto by this oblation? Rep. But it is said, that although
immediately, and in the first place, this right did arise unto God by the death of Christ, yet that that
also was to tend to our good, Christ obtaining that right, that the Lord might now bestow mercy on
us, if we fulfilled the condition that he would propose. But I answer, that this utterly overthrows all
the merit of the death of Christ towards us, and leaves not so much as the nature of merit unto it;
for that which is truly meritorious indeed deserves that the thing merited, or procured and
obtained by it, shall be done, or ought to be bestowed, and not only that it may be done. There is
such a habitude and relation between merit and the thing obtained by it, whether it be absolute or
arising on contract, that there ariseth a real right to the thing procured by it in them by whom or
for whom it is procured. When the labourer hath wrought all day, do we say, "Now his wages may
be paid,"or rather, "Now they ought to be paid"? Hath he not a right unto it? Was ever such a
merit heard of before, whose nature should consist in this, that the thing procured by it might be
bestowed, and not that it ought to be? And shall Christ be said now to purchase by his
meritorious oblation this only at his Father’s hand, that he might bestow upon and apply the
fulness of his death to some or all, and not that he should so do "To him that worketh," saith the
apostle, " is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt," Rom. iv. 4. Are not the fruits of the
death of Christ by his death as truly procured for us as if they had been obtained by our own
working? And if so, though in respect of the persons on whom they are bestowed they are of free
grace, yet in respect of the purchase, the bestowing of them is of debt.
Fourthly, That cannot be assigned as the complete end of the death of Christ, which being
accomplished, it had not only been possible that not one soul might be saved, but also impossible
that by virtue of it any sinful soul should be saved; for sure the Scripture is exceedingly full in
declaring that through Christ we have remission of sins, grace, and glory (as afterward). But now,
notwithstanding this, that Christ is said to have procured and purchased by his death such a right
and liberty to his Father, that he might bestow eternal life upon all upon what conditions he would,
it might very well stand that not one of those should enjoy eternal life: for suppose the Father
would not bestow it, as he is by no engagement, according to this persuasion, bound to do (he
had a right to do it, it is true, but that which is any one’s right he may use or not use at his
pleasure); again, suppose he had prescribed a condition of works which it had been impossible
for them to fulfil; — the death of Christ might have had its full end, and yet not one been saved.
Was this his coming to save sinners, to "save that which was lost?" or could he, upon such an
accomplishment as this, pray as he did, "Father, I will that those whom thou hast given me be
with me where I am; that they may behold my glory?" John xvii. 24. Divers other reasons might
be used to evert this fancy, that would make the purchase of Christ, in respect of us, not to be the
remission of sins, but a possibility of it; not salvation, but a salvability; not reconciliation and
peace with God, but the opening of a door towards it; — but I shall use them in assigning the right
end of the death of Christ.
Ask now of these, what it is that the Father can do, and will do, upon the death of Chris", by
which means his justice, that before hindered the execution of his good-will towards them, is
satisfied? and they tell you it is the entering into a new covenant of grace with them, upon the
performance of whose condition they shall have all the benefits of the death of Christ applied to
them. But to us it seemeth that Christ himself, with his death and passion, is the chief promise of
the new covenant itself, as Gen. iii. 15; and so the covenant cannot be said to be procured by his
death. Besides, the nature of the covenant overthrows this proposal, that they that are
covenanted withal shall have such and such good things if they fulfil the condition, as though that
all depended on this obedience, when that obedience itself, and the whole condition of it, is a
promise of the covenant, Jer. xxxi. 83, which is confirmed and sealed by the blood of Christ. We
deny not but that the death of Christ hath a proper end in respect of God,– to wit, the
manifestation of his glory; whence he calls him "his servant, in whom he will be glorified," Isa.
xlix.3. And the bringing of many sons to glory, wherewith he was betrusted, was to the
manifestation and praise of his glorious grace; that so his love to his elect might gloriously
appear, his salvation being borne out by Christ to the utmost parts of the earth. And this full
declaration of his glory, by the way of mercy tempered with justice (for "he set forth Christ to be a
propitiation through faith in his blood, that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth
in Jesus," Rom. iii. 25, 26), is all that which accrued to the Lord by the death of his Son, and not
any right and liberty of doing that which before he would have done, but could not for his justice.
In respect of us, the end of the oblation and blood-shedding of Jesus Christ was, not that God
might if he would, but that he shouldst, by virtue of that compact and covenant which was the
foundation of the merit of Christ, bestow upon us all the good things which Christ aimed at and
intended to purchase and procure by his offering of himself for us unto God; which is in the next
place to be declared.

CHAPTER III.
More particularly of the immediate end of the death of Christ, with the several ways whereby it is
designed.
WHAT the Scripture affirms in this particular we laid down in the entrance of the whole discourse;
which now, having enlarged in explication of our sense and meaning therein, must be more
particularly asserted, by an application of the particular places (which are very many) to our thesis
as before declared, whereof this is the sum: — "Jesus Christ., according to the counsel and will of
his Father, did offer himself upon the cross, to the procurement of those things before recounted;
and maketh continual intercession with this intent and purpose, that all the good things so
procured by his death might be actually and infallibly bestowed on and applied to all and every
one for whom he died, according to the will and counsel of God." Let us now see what the
Scripture saith hereunto, the sundry places whereof we shall range under these heads: — First,
Those that hold out the intention and counsel of God, with our Saviour’s own mind; whose will
was one with his Father’s in this business. Secondly, Those that lay down the actual
accomplishment or effect of his oblation, what it did really procure, effect, and produce. Thirdly,
Those that point out the persons for whom Christ died, as designed peculiarly to be the object of
this work of redemption in the end and purpose of God.
I. For the first, or those which hold out the counsel, purpose, mind, intention, and will of God and
our Saviour in this work: Matt. xviii. 11, "The Son of man is come to save that which was lost;"
which words he repeateth again upon another occasion, Luke xix. 10. In the first place, they are
in the front of the parable of seeking the lost sheep; in the other, they are in the close of the
recovery of lost Zaccheus; and in both places set forth the end of Christs-coming, which was to
do the will of his Father by the recovery of lost sinners: and that as Zaccheus was recovered by
conversion, by bringing into the free covenant, making him a son of Abraham, or as the lost
sheep which he lays upon his shoulder and bringeth home; so unless he findeth that which he
seeketh for, unless he recover that which he cometh to save, he faileth of his purpose.
Secondly, Matt. i. 21, where the angel declareth the end of Christ’s coming in the flesh, and
consequently of all his sufferings therein, is to the same purpose. He was to "save his people
from their sins." Whatsoever is required for a complete and perfect saving of his peculiar people
from their sins was intended by his coming’ To say that he did but in part or in some regard effect
the work of salvation, is of ill report to Christian ears.
Thirdly, The like expression is that also of Paul, 1 Tim. i. 15, evidently declaring the end of our
Saviour’s coming, according to the will and counsel of his Father, namely, to "save sinners;" — not
to open a door for them to come in if they will or can; not to make a way passable, that they may
be saved; not to purchase reconciliation and pardon of his Father, which perhaps they shall never
enjoy; but actually to save them from all the guilt and power of sin, and from the wrath of God for
sin: which, if he doth not accomplish, he fails of the end of his coming; and if that ought not to be
alarmed, surely he came for no more than towards whom that effect is procured. The compact of
his Father with him, and his promise made unto him, of "seeing his seed, and carrying along the
pleasure of the LORD prosperously," Isa. liii 10 — 12, I before declared; from which it is apparent
that the decree and purpose of giving actually unto Christ a believing generation, whom he calleth
" The children that God gave him," Heb. ii 18, is inseparably annexed to the decree of Christ’s
"making his soul an offering for sin," and is the end and aim thereof.
Fourthly, As the apostle farther declareth, Heb. ii 14, 15, "Forasmuch as the children are
partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he
might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through
fear of death," etc. Than which words nothing can more clearly set forth the entire end of that
whole dispensation of the incarnation and offering of Jesus Christ,– even a deliverance of the
children whom God gave him from the power of death, hell, and the devil, so bringing them nigh
unto God. Nothing at all of the purchasing of a possible deliverance for all and every one; nay, all
are not those children which God gave him, all are not delivered from death and him that had the
power of it: and therefore it was not all for whom he then took flesh and blood.
Fifthly, The same purpose and intention we have, Eph. v. 25 — 27, "Christ loved the church, and
gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such
thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish:" as also, Tit. ii. 14, "He gave himself for us,
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of
good works." I think nothing can be clearer than these two places; nor is it possible for the wit of
man to invent expressions so fully and livelily to set out the thing we intend, as it is in both these
places by the Holy Ghost. What did Christ do? "He gave himself," say both these places alike:
"For his church," saith one; "For us," saith the other; both words of equal extent and force, as all
men know. To what end did he this? "To sanctify and cleanse it, to present it to himself a glorious
church, not having spot or wrinkle," saith he to the Ephesians; "To redeem us from all iniquity,
and to purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works," saith he to Titus. I ask now,
Are all men of this church? Are all in that rank of men among whom Paul placeth himself and
Titus? Are all purged, purified, sanctified, made glorious, brought nigh unto Christ? or doth Christ
fail in his aim towards the greatest part of men? I dare not close with any of these.
Sixthly, Will you hear our Saviour Christ himself expressing this more evidently, restraining the
object, declaring his whole design and purpose, and affirming the end of his death? John xvii. 19,
"For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." "For their
sakes." Whose, I pray? "The men whom thou hast given me out of the world," verse 6. Not the
whole world, whom he prayed not for, verse 9. "I sanctify myself." Whereunto? "To the work I am
now going about, even to be an oblation." And to what end? –" That they also may be truly
sanctified." "That they," signifies the intent and purpose of Christ,– it designs out the end he
aimed at,– which our hope is (and that is the hope of the gospel), that he hath accomplished ("for
the Deliverer that cometh out of Sion turneth away ungodliness from Jacob," Rom. xi. 26); — and
that herein there was a concurrence of the will of his Father, yea, that this his purpose was to fulfil
the will of his Father, which he come to do.
Seventhly, And that this also was his counsel is apparent, Gal. i. 4; for our Lord Jesus "gave
himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of
God and our Father;" which will and purpose of his the apostle farther declares, chap. iv. 4 — 6,
"God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under
the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons;" and, because sons, our deliverance from the
law, and thereby our freedom from the guilt of sin. Our adoption to sons, receiving the Spirit, and
drawing nigh unto God, are all of them in the purpose of the Father giving his only Son for us.
Eighthly, I shall add but one place more, of the very many more that might be cited to this
purpose, and that is 2 Cor. v. 21, "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him." The purpose of God in making his Son to be sin
is, that those for whom he was made sin might become righteousness; that was the end of God’s
sending Christ to be so, and Christ’s willingness to become so. Now, if the Lord did not purpose
what is not fulfilled, yea, what he knew should never be fulfilled, and what he would not work at all
that it might be fulfilled (either of which are most atheistical expressions), then he made Christ sin
for no more than do in the effect become actually righteousness in him: so that the counsel and
will of God, with the purpose and intention of Christ, by his oblation and blood-shedding, was to
fulfil that will and counsel, is from these places made apparent.
From all which we draw this argument: — That which the Father and the Son intended to
accomplish in and towards all those for whom Christ died, by his death that is most certainly
effected (if any shall deny this proposition, I will at any time, by the Lord’s assistance, take up the
assertion of it;) but the Father and his Son intended by the death of Christ to redeem, purge,
sanctify, purify, deliver from death, Satan, the curse of the law, to quit of all sin, to make
righteousness in Christ, to bring nigh unto God, all those for whom he died, as was above proved:
therefore, Christ died for all and only those in and towards whom all these things recounted are
effected; — which, whether they are all and. every one, I leave to all and every one to judge that
hath any knowledge in these things.
II. The second rank contains those places which lay down the actual accomplishment and effect
of this oblation, or what it doth really produce and effect in and towards them for whom it is an
oblation. Such are Heb. ix. 12, 14, "By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place,
having obtained eternal redemption for us…., The blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit
offered himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living
God." Two things are here ascribed to the blood of Christ; — one referring to God, " It obtains
eternal redemption;" the other respecting us, "It purgeth our consciences from dead works:" so
that justification with God, by procuring for us an eternal redemption from the guilt of our sins and
his wrath due unto them, with sanctification in ourselves (or, as it is called, Heb. i. 3, a "purging
our sins"), is the immediate product of that blood by which he entered into the holy place, of that
oblation which, through the eternal Spirit, he presented unto God. Yea, this meritorious purging of
our sins is peculiarly ascribed to his offering, as performed before his ascension: Heb. i. 3, "When
he had by himself purged our sins, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;" and
again, most expressly, chap. ix. 26, "He hath appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of
himself:" which expiation, or putting away of sin by the way of sacrifice, must needs be the actual
sanctification of them for whom he was a sacrifice, even as "the blood of bulls and goats, and the
ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh," verse 13.
Certain it is, that whosoever was either polluted or guilty, for whom there was an expiation and
sacrifice allowed in those carnal ordinances, "which had a shadow of good things to come," had
truly; — first, A legal cleansing and sanctifying, to the purifying of the flesh; and, secondly,
Freedom from the punishment which was due to the breach of the law, as it was the rule of
conversation to God’s people: so much his sacrifice carnally accomplished for him that was
admitted thereunto. Now, these things being but "shadows of good things to come," certainly the
sacrifice of Christ did effect spiritually, for all them for whom it was a sacrifice, whatever the other
could typify out; that is, spiritual cleansing by sanctification, and freedom from the guilt of sin:
which the places produced do evidently prove. Now, whether this be accomplished in all and for
them all, let all that are able judge.
Again; Christ, by his death, and in it, is said to "bear our sins:" so 1 Pet. ii. 24, "His own self bare
our sins;" — where you have both what he did, " Bare our sins" (he carried them up with him upon
the cross); and what he intended, "That we being dead unto sins, should live unto righteousness."
And what was the effect? "By his stripes we are healed:" which latter, as it is taken from the same
place of the prophet where our Saviour is affirmed to "bear our iniquities, and to have them laid
upon him" (Isa. liii, 5, 6, 10 — 12), so it is expository of the former, and will tell us what Christ did
by "bearing our sins;" which phrase is more than once used in the Scripture to this purpose. 1.
Christ, then, so bare our iniquities by his death, that, by virtue of the stripes and afflictions which
he underwent in his offering himself for us, this is certainly procured and effected, that we should
go free, and not suffer any of those things which he underwent for us. To which, also, you may
refer all those places which evidently hold out a commutation in this point of suffering between
Christ and us: Gal. iii. 13, "He delivered us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us;"
with divers others which we shall have occasion afterward to mention.
Peace, also, and reconciliation with God,– that is, actual peace by the removal of all enmity on
both sides, with all the causes of it,– is fully ascribed to this oblation: Col. i 21, 22, "And you, that
were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblamable and unreprovable in
his sight;" as also Eph. ii. 13 — 16, "Ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of
Christ: for he is our peace; having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of
commandments, that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the
enmity thereby." To which add all those places wherein plenary deliverances from anger, wrath,
death, and him that had the power of it, is likewise asserted as the fruit thereof, as Rom. v. 8 –
10, and ye have a farther discovery made of the immediate effect of the death of Christ. Peace
and reconciliation, deliverance from wrath, enmity, and whatever lay against us to keep us from
enjoying the love and favour of God,– a redemption from all these he effected for his church "with
his own blood," Acts xx. 28. Whence all and every one for whom he died may truly say, "Who
shall lay any thing to our charge? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ
that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh
intercession for us," Rom. viii. 33, 84. Which that they are procured for all and every one of the
sons of Adam, that they all may use that rejoicing in full assurance, cannot be made appear. And
yet evident it is that so it is with all for whom he died,– that these are the effects of his death in
and towards them for whom he underwent it: for by his being slain "he redeemed them to God by
his blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; and made them unto our
God kings and priests," Rev. v. 9, 10; for "he made an end of their sins, he made reconciliation for
their iniquity, and brought in everlasting righteousness," Dan. ix. 24.
Add also those other places where our life is ascribed to the death of Christ, and then this
enumeration will be perfect: John vi. 33, He "came down from heaven to give life to the world."
Sure enough he giveth life to that world for which he gave his life. It is the world of " his sheep, for
which he layeth down his life," chap. x. 15, even that he might " give unto them eternal life, that
they might never perish," verse 28. So he appeared "to abolish death, and to bring life and
immortality to light," 2 Tim. i. 10; as also Rom. v. 6 — 10.
Now, there is none of all these places but will afford a sufficient strength against the general
ransom, or the universality of the merit of Christ. My leisure will not serve for so large a
prosecution of the subject as that would require, and, therefore, I shall take from the whole this
general argument: — If the death and oblation of Jesus Christ (as a sacrifice to his Father) doth
sanctify all them for whom it was a sacrifice; doth purge away their sin; redeem them from wrath,
curse, and guilt; work for them peace and reconciliation with God; procure for them life and
immortality; bearing their iniquities and healing all their diseases; — then died he only for those
that are in the event sanctified, purged, redeemed, justified, freed from wrath and death,
quickened, saved, etc.; but that all are not thus sanctified, freed, etc., is most apparent: and,
therefore, they cannot be said to be the proper object of the death of Christ. The supposal was
confirmed before; the inference is plain from Scripture and experience, and the whole argument
(if I mistake not) solid.
III. Many places there are that point out the persons for whom Christ died, as designed peculiarly
to be the object of this work of redemption, according to the aim and purpose of God; some of
which we will briefly recount. In some places they are called many: Matt. xxvi. 28, "The blood of
the new testament is shed for many, for the remission of sins." "By his knowledge shall my
righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities," Isa. liii. 11. "The Son of man
came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and give his life a ransom for many," Mark x. 45;
Matt. xx. 28. He was to "bring many sons unto glory;" and so was to be the "captain of their
salvation, through sufferings," Heb. ii. 10. And though perhaps the word many itself be not
sufficient to restrain the object of Christ’s death unto some, in opposition to all, because many is
sometimes placed absolutely for all, as Rom. v. 19, yet these many being described in other
places to be such as it is most certain all are not, so it is a full and evident restriction of it: for
these many are the "sheep" of Christ, John x. 15; the "children of God that were scattered
abroad," chap. xi. 52; those whom our Saviour calleth "brethren," Heb. ii. 11; "the children that
God gave him," which were "partakers of flesh and blood," verses 13, 14; and frequently, "those
who were given unto him of his Father," John xvii. 2, 6, 9, 11, who should certainly be preserved;
the "sheep" whereof he was the "Shepherd, through the blood of the everlasting covenant," Heb.
xiii. 20; his " elect," Rom. viii. 33; and his " people," Matt. i. 21; farther explained to be his "visited
and redeemed people,"Luke i. 68; even the people which he "foreknew," Rom. xi. 2; even such a
people as he is said to have had at Corinth before their conversion; his people by election, Acts
xviii. 10; the people that he " suffered for without the gate, that he might sanctify them," Heb. xiii.
12; his "church, which he redeemed by his own blood,"Acts xx. 28, which "he loved and gave
himself for," Eph. v. 25; the "many" whose sins he took away, Heb. ix. 28, with whom he made a
covenant, Dan. ix. 27. Those many being thus described, and set forth with such qualifications as
by no means are common to all, but proper only to the elect, do most evidently appear to be all
and only those that are chosen of God to obtain eternal life through the offering and bloodshedding
of Jesus Christ. Many things are here excepted with much confidence and clamour, that
may easily be removed. And so you see the end of the death of Christ, as it is set out in the
Scripture.
That we may have the clearer passage, we must remove the hindrances that are laid in the way
by some pretended answers and evasions used to escape the force of the argument drawn from
the Scripture, affirming Christ to have died for " many," his "sheep," his "elect," and the like. Now,
to this it is replied, that this "reason," as it is called, is "weak and of no force, equivocal, subtile,
fraudulent, false, ungodly, deceitful, and erroneous;" for all these several epithets are
accumulated to adorn it withal, ("Universality of Free Grace," page xvi.) Now, this variety of terms
(as I conceive) serves only to declare with what copia verborum the unlearned eloquence of the
author is woven withal; for such terrible names imposed on that which we know not well how to
gainsay is a strong argument of a weak cause. When the Pharisees were not able to resist the
spirit whereby our Saviour spake, they call him "devil and Samaritan." Waters that make a noise
are usually but shallow. It is a proverb among the Scythians, that the "dogs which bark most bite
least." But let us see "quid dignum tanto feret hic responsor hiatu," and hear him speak in his own
language. He says then,–
"First, This reason is weak and of no force: for the word many is oft so used, that it both signifies
all and every man, and also amplifieth or setteth forth the greatness of that number; as in Dan. xii.
2, Rom. v. 19, and in other places, where many cannot, nor is by any Christian understood for
less than all men."
Rep. 1. That if the proof and argument were taken merely from the word many, and not from the
annexed description of those many, with the presupposed distinction of all men into several sorts
by the purpose of God, this exception would bear some colour; but for this see our arguments
following. Only by the way observe, that he that shall divide the inhabitants of any place, as at
London, into poor and rich, those that want and those that abound, afterward affirming that he will
bestow his bounty on many at London, on the poor, on those that want, will easily be understood
to give it unto and bestow it upon them only. 2. Neither of the places quoted proves directly that
many must necessarily in them be taken for all. In Dan. xii. 2, a distribution of the word to the
several parts of the affirmation must be allowed, and not an application of it to the whole, as such;
and so the sense is, the dead shall arise, many to life, and many to shame, as in another
language it would have been expressed. Neither are such Hebraisms unusual. Resides, perhaps,
it is not improbable that many are said to rise to life, because, as the apostle, says, " All shall not
die." The like, also, may be said of Rom. v. 19. Though the many there seem to be all, yet
certainly they are not called so with any intent to denote all, "with an amplification" (which that
many should be to all is not likely): for there is no comparison there instituted at all between
number and number, of those that died by Adam’s disobedience and those that were made alive
by the righteousness of Christ, but only in the effects of the sin of Adam and the righteousness of
Christ, together with the way and manner of communicating death and life from the one and the
other; whereunto any consideration of the number of the participators of those effects is not
inserted. 3. The other places whereby this should he confirmed, I am confident our author cannot
produce, notwithstanding his free inclination of such a reserve, these being those which are in
this case commonly urged by Arminians; but if he could, they would be no way material to infringe
our argument, as appeareth by what was said before.
"Secondly, This reason," he adds, "is equivocal, subtile, and fraudulent; seeing where all men
and every man is affirmed of, the death of Christ, as the ransom and propitiation, and the fruits
thereof, only is assumed for them; but where the word many is in any place used in this business,
there are more ends of the death of Christ than this one affirmed of."
Rep. l. It is denied that the death of Christ, in any place of Scripture, is said to be for "all men" or
for "every man;" which, with so much confidence, is supposed, and imposed on us as a thing
acknowledged. 2. That there is any other end of the death of Christ, besides the fruit of his
ransom and propitiation, directly intended, and not by accident attending it, is utterly false. Yea,
what other end the ransom paid by Christ and the atonement made by him can have but the fruits
of them, is not imaginable. The end of any work is the same with the fruit, effect, or product of it.
So that this wild distinction of the ransom and propitiation of Christ, with the fruits of them, to be
for all, and the other ends of his death to be only for many, is an assertion neither equivocal,
subtile, nor fraudulent! But I speak to what I conceive the meaning of the place; for the words
themselves bear no tolerable sense. 3. The observation, that where the word many is used many
ends are designed, but where all are spoken of there only the ransom is intimated, is,– (1.)
Disadvantageous to the author’s persuasion, yielding the whole argument in hand, by
acknowledging that where many are mentioned, there all cannot be understood, because more
ends of the death of Christ than do belong to all are mentioned; and so confessedly all the other
answers to prove that by many, all are to be understood, are against the author’s own light. (2.) It
is frivolous; for it cannot be proved that there are more ends of the death of Christ besides the
fruit of his ransom. (3.) It is false; for where the death of Christ is spoken of as for many, he is
said to "give his life a ransom" for them, Matt. xx. 28, which are the very words where he is said
to die for all, 1 Tim. ii. 6. What difference is there in these? what ground for this observation?
Even such as these are divers others of that author’s observations, as his whole tenth chapter is
spent to prove that wherever there is mention of the redemption purchased by the oblation of
Christ, there they for whom it is purchased are always spoken of in the third person, as by " all
the world," or the like; when yet, in chap. i. of his book, himself produceth many places to prove
this general redemption where the persons for whom Christ is said to suffer are mentioned in the
first or second person, 1 Pet. ii 24, iii. 18; Isa. liii. 6, 6; 1 Cor. xv. 3; Gal iii. 13, etc.
Thirdly, He proceeds, " This reason is false and ungodly; for it is nowhere in Scripture said that
Christ died or gave himself a ransom but for many, or only for many, or only for his sheep; and it
is ungodliness to add to or diminish from the word of God in Scripture."
Rep. To pass by the loving terms of the author, and allowing a grain to make the sense current, I
say,– First, That Christ affirming that he gave his life for "many," for his "sheep," being said to die
for his " church," and innumerable places of Scripture witnessing that all men are not of his
sheep, of his church, we argue and conclude, by just and undeniable consequence, that he died
not for those who are not so. If this be adding to the word of God (being only an exposition and
unfolding of his mind therein), who ever spake from the word of God and was guiltless? Secondly,
Let it be observed, that in the very place where our Saviour says that he "gave his life for his
sheep," he presently adds, that some are not of his sheep, John x. 26; which, if it be not
equivalent to his sheep only, I know not what is Thirdly, It were easy to recriminate; but,–
Fourthly, "But," says he, "the reason is deceitful and erroneous, for the Scripture doth nowhere
say,– 2. "Those many he died for are his sheep (much less his elect, as the reason intends it). As
for the place, John x. 15, usually instanced to this end, it is therein much abused: for our Saviour,
John x., did not set forth the difference between such as he died for and such as he died not for,
or such as he died for so and so, and not so and so; but the difference between those that believe
on him and those who believe not on him, verses 4, 5, 14, 26, 27. One hear his voice and follow
him, the other not. Nor did our Saviour here set forth the privileges of all he died for, or for whom
he died so and so, but of those that believe on him through the ministration of the gospel, and so
do know him, and approach to God, and enter the kingdom by him, verses 8, 4, 9, 27. Nor was
our Saviour here setting forth the excellency of those for whom he died, or died for so only,
wherein they are preferred before others; but the excellency of his own love, with the fruits thereof
to those not only that he died for, but also that are brought in by his ministration to believe on him,
verses 11, 27. Nor was our Saviour here treating so much of his ransom-giving and propitiationmaking
as of his ministration of the gospel, and so of his love and faithfulness therein; wherein he
laid down his life for those ministered to, and therein gave us example, not to make propitiation
for sin, but to testify love in suffering."
Rep. I am persuaded that nothing but an acquaintedness with the condition of the times wherein
we live can afford me sanctuary from the censure of the reader to be lavish of precious hours, in
considering and transcribing such canting lines as these last repeated. But yet, seeing better
cannot be afforded, we must be content to view such evasions as these, all whose strength is in
incongruous expressions, in incoherent structure, cloudy, windy phrases, all tending to raise such
a mighty fog as that the business in hand might not be perceived, being lost in this smoke and
vapour, cast out to darken the eyes and amuse the senses of poor seduced souls. The argument
undertaken to be answered being, that Christ is said to die for " many," and those many are
described and designed to be his "sheep," as John x., what answer, I pray, or any thing like
thereunto, is there to be picked out of this confused heap of words which we have recited? So
that I might safely pass the whole evasion by without farther observation on it, but only to desire
the reader to observe how much this one argument presseth, and what a nothing is that heap of
confusion which is opposed to it! But yet, lest any thing should adhere, I will give a few
annotations to the place, answering the marks wherewith we have noted it, leaving the full
vindication of the place until I come to the pressing of our arguments.
I say then, first, That the many Christ died for were his sheep, was before declared. Neither is
the place of John x. at all abused, our Saviour evidently setting forth a difference between them
for whom he died and those for whom he would not die, calling the first his " sheep," verse 15,–
those to whom he would "give eternal life," verse 28,– those "given him by his Father," chap. xvii.
9; evidently distinguishing them from others who were not so. Neither is it material what was the
primary intention of our Saviour in this place, from which we do not argue, but from the intention
and aim of the words he uses, and the truth he reveals for the end aimed at; which was the
consolation of believers.
Secondly, ‘For the difference between them he "died for so and so," and those he "died for so
and so," we confess he puts none; for we suppose that this "so and so" doth neither express nor
intimate any thing that may be suitable to any purpose of God, or intent of our Saviour in this
business. To us for whom he died, he died in the same manner, and for the same end.
Thirdly, We deny that the primary difference that here is made by our Saviour is between
believers and not believers, but between elect and not elect, sheep and not sheep; the thing
wherein they are thus differenced being the believing of the one, called "hearing of his voice and
knowing him," and the not believing of the other; the foundation of these acts being their different
conditions in respect of God’s purpose and Christ’s love, as is apparent from the antithesis and
opposition which we have in verses 26 and 27, "Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,"
and, "My sheep hear my voice." First, there is a distinction put,– in the act of believing and
hearing (that is, therewithal to obey); and then is the foundation of this distinction asserted, from
their distinguished state and condition,– the one being not his sheep, the other being so, even
them whom he loved and gave his life for.
Fourthly, ‘first, It is nothing to the business before us what privileges our Saviour here
expresseth; our question is, for whom he says he would give his life’s and that only. Secondly,
This frequent repetition of that useless so and so serves for nothing but to puzzle the poor
ignorant reader. Thirdly, We deny that Christ died for any but those who shall certainly be brought
unto him by the ministration of the gospel. So that there is not a "Not only those whom he died
for, but also those that are brought in unto him;" for he died for his sheep, and his sheep hear his
voice. They for whom he dried, and those that come in to him, may receive different
qualifications, but they are not several persons.
Fifthly, First, The question is not at all, to what end our Saviour here makes mention of his
death? but for whom he died? who are expressly said to be his "sheep;" which all are not.
Secondly, His intention is, to declare the giving of his life for a ransom, and that according to the
"commandment received of his Father," verse 18.
Sixthly, First, "The love and faithfulness of Jesus Christ in the ministration of the gospel," — that
is, his performing the office of the mediator of the new covenant,– are seen in nothing more than
in giving his life for a ransom, John xv. 13. Secondly, Here is not one word of giving us an
"example;" though in laying down his life he did that also, yet here it is not improved to that
purpose. From these brief annotations, I doubt not but that it is apparent that that long discourse
before recited is nothing but a miserable mistaking of the text and question; which the author
perhaps perceiving, he adds divers other evasions, which follow.
"Besides," saith he, "the opposition appears here to be not so much between elect and not elect,
as between Jews called and Gentiles uncalled."
Rep. The opposition is between sheep and not sheep, and that with reference to their election,
and not to their vocation. Now, whom would he have signified by the "not sheep"? those that were
not called,– the Gentiles? That is against the text terming them sheep, that is in designation,
though not as yet called, verse 16. And who are the called’! the Jews? True, they were then
outwardly called; yet many of them were not sheep, verse 26. Now, truly, such evasions from the
force of truth as this, by so foul corrupting of the word of God, is no small provocation of the eye
of his glory. But he adds,–
"Besides, there is in Scripture great difference between sheep, and sheep of his flock and
pasture, of which he here speaketh, verses 4, 6, 11, 15, 16." Rep. 1. This unrighteous distinction
well explained must needs, no doubt (if any know how), give a great deal of light to the business
in hand. 2. If there be a distinction to be allowed, it can be nothing but this, that the "sheep" who
are simply so called are those who are only so to Christ from the donation of his Father; and the
"sheep of his pasture," those who, by the effectual working of the Spirit, are actually brought
home to Christ. And then of both sorts we have mention in this chapter, verses 16, 27, both
making up the number of those sheep for whom he gave his life, and to whom he giveth life. But
he proceeds: –
"Besides, sheep, verses 4, 5, ll, 15, are not mentioned as all those for whom he died, but as
those who by his ministration are brought in to believe and enjoy the benefit of his death, and to
whom he ministereth and communicateth spirit."
Rep. 1. The substance of this and other exceptions is, that by sheep is meant believers; which is
contrary to verse 16, calling them sheep who are not as yet gathered into his fold. 2. That his
sheep are not mentioned as those for whom he died is in terms contradictory to verse 15, "I lay
down my life for my sheep." 3. Between those for whom he died and those whom he brings in by
the ministration of his Spirit, there is no more difference than is between Peter, James, and John,
and the three apostles that were in the mount with our Saviour at his transfiguration. This is
childish sophistry, to beg the thing in question, and thrust in the opinion controverted into the
room of an answer. 4. That bringing in which is here mentioned, to believe and enjoy the benefit
of the death of Christ, is a most special fruit and benefit of that death, certainly to be conferred on
all them for whom he died, or else most certainly his death will do them no good at all. Once
more, and we have done: — " Besides, here are more ends of his death mentioned than ransom
or propitiation only, and yet it is not said, ‘ Only for his sheep," and when the ransom or
propitiation only is mentioned, it is said, ‘For all men.’ So that this reason appears weak,
fraudulent, ungodly, and erroneous."
Rep. 1. Here is no word mentioned nor intimated of the death of Christ, but only that which was
accomplished by his being a propitiation, and making his death a ransom for us, with the fruits
which certainly and infallibly spring there from. 2. If more ends than one of the death of Christ are
here mentioned, and such as belong not unto all, why do you deny that he speaks here of his
sheep only? Take heed, or you will see the truth. 3. Where it is said, "Of all men," I know not; but
this I am sure, that Christ is said to "give his life a ransom," and that is only mentioned where it is
not said for all; as Matt. xx. 28, Mark x. 45.
And so, from these brief annotations, I hope any indifferent reader will be able to judge whether
the reason opposed, or the exceptions against it devised, be to be accounted "weak, fraudulent,
ungodly, and erroneous."
Although I fear that in this particular I have already intrenched upon the reader’s patience, yet I
cannot let pass the discourse immediately following in the same author to those exceptions which
we last removed, laid by him against the arguments we had in hand, without an obelisk; as also
an observation of his great abilities to cast down a man of clouds, which himself had set up to
manifest his skill in its direction. To the preceding discourse he adds another exception, which he
imposeth on those that oppose universal redemption, as though it were laid by them against the
understanding of the general expressions in the Scripture, in that way and sense wherein he
conceives them; and it is, "That those words were fitted for the time of Christ and his apostles,
having another meaning in them than they seem to import." Now, having thus gaily trimmed and
set up this man of straw,– to whose framing I dare boldly say not one of his adversaries did ever
contribute a penful of ink,– to show his rare skill, he chargeth it with I know not how many errors,
blasphemies, lies, set on-with exclamations and vehement outcries, until it tumble to the ground.
Had he not sometimes answered an argument, he would have been thought a most unhappy
disputant. Now, to make sure that for once he would do it, I believe he was very careful that the
objection of his own framing should not be too strong for his own defacing. In the meantime, how
blind are they who admire him for a combatant who is skilful only at fencing with his own shadow!
and yet with such empty janglings as these, proving what none denies, answering what none
objects, is the greatest part of Mr More’s book stuffed.

CHAPTER IV.
Of the distinction of impetration and application — The use and abuse thereof; with the opinion of
the adversaries upon the whole matter in controversy unfolded; and the question on both sides
stated.
THE farther reasons whereby the precedent discourse may be confirmed, I defer until I come to
oppose some argument to the general ransom. For the present, I shall only take away that
general answer which is usually given to the places of Scripture produced, to waive the sense of
them; which is pharmanon pansophon to our adversaries, and serves them, as they suppose, to
bear up all the weight wherewith in this case they are urged: –
I. They say, then, that in the oblation of Christ, and concerning the good things by him procured,
two things are to be considered: — First, The impetrution, or obtaining of them; and, secondly,
The application of them to particular persons. "The first," say they, "is general, in respect to all.
Christ obtained and procured all good things by his death of his Father,– reconciliation,
redemption, forgiveness of sins,– for all and every man in the world, if they will believe and lay
hold upon him: but in respect of application, they are actually bestowed and conferred but on a
few; because but a few believe, which is the condition on which they are bestowed. And in this
latter sense are the texts of Scripture which we have argued, all of them, to be understood. So
that they do no whit impeach the universality of merit, which they assert; but only the universality
of application, which they also deny." Now, this answer is commonly set forth by them in various
terms and divers dresses, according as it seems best to them that use it, and most subservient to
their several opinions; for,–
First, Some of them say that Christ, by his death and passion, did absolutely, according to the
intention of God, purchase for all and every man, dying for them, remission of sins and
reconciliation with God, or a restitution into a state of grace and favour; all which shall be actually
beneficial to them. provided that they do believe So the Arminians.
Secondly, Some, again, that Christ died for all indeed, but conditionally for some, if they do
believe, or will so do (which he knows they cannot of themselves); and absolutely for his own,
even them on whom lie purposeth to bestow faith and grace, so as actually to be made
possessors of the good things by him purchased. So Camero, and the divines of France, which
follow a new method by him devised.
Thirdly, Some distinguish of a twofold reconciliation and redemption; — one wrought by Christ
with God for man, which, say they, is general for all and every man; secondly, a reconciliation
wrought by Christ in man unto God, bringing them actually into peace with him.
And sundry other ways there are whereby men express their conceptions in this business. The
sum of all comes to this, and the weight of all lies upon that distinction which we before
recounted; — namely, that in respect of impetration, Christ obtained redemption and reconciliation
for all; in respect of application, it is bestowed only on them who do believe and continue therein.
II. Their arguments whereby they prove the generality of the ransom and universality of the
reconciliation must afterward be considered: for the present, we handle only the distinction itself,
the meaning and misapplication whereof I shall briefly declare; which will appear if we consider,–
FIRST, The true nature and meaning of this distinction, and the true use thereof; for we do
acknowledge that it may be used in a sound sense and right meaning, which way soever you
express it, either by impetration and application, or by procuring reconciliation with God and a
working of reconciliation in us For by impetration we mean the meritorious purchase of all good
things made by Christ for us with and of his Father; and by application, the actual enjoyment of
those good things upon our believing; — as, if a man pay a price for the redeeming of captives,
the paying of the price supplieth the room of the impetration of which we speak; and the freeing of
the captives is as the application of it. Yet, then, we must observe,–
First, That this distinction hath no place in the intention and purpose of Christ, but only in respect
of the things procured by him; for in his purpose they are both united, his full end and aim being
to deliver us from all evil, and procure all good actually to be bestowed upon us. But in respect of
the things themselves, they may be considered either as procured by Christ, or as bestowed on
us.
Secondly, That the will of God is not at all conditional in this business, as though he gave Christ
to obtain peace, reconciliation, and forgiveness of sins, upon condition that we do believe. There
is a condition in the things, but none in the will of God; that is absolute that such things should be
procured and bestowed.
Thirdly, That all the things which Christ obtained for us are not bestowed upon condition, but
some of them absolutely. And as for those that are bestowed upon condition, the condition on
which they are bestowed is actually purchased and procured for us, upon no condition but only by
virtue of the purchase. For instance: Christ hath purchased remission of sins and eternal life for
us, to be enjoyed on our believing, upon the condition of faith. But faith itself, which is the
condition of them, on whose performance they are bestowed, that he hath procured for us
absolutely, on no condition at all; for what condition soever can be proposed, on which the Lord
should bestow faith, I shall afterward show it vain, and to run into a circle.
Fourthly, That both these, impetration, and application, have for their objects the same individual
persons; that, look, for whomsoever Christ obtained any good thing by his death, unto them it
shall certainly be applied, upon them it shall actually be bestowed: so that it cannot be said that
he obtained any thing for any one, which that one shall not or doth not in due time enjoy. For
whomsoever he wrought reconciliation with, God, in them doth he work reconciliation unto God.
The one is not extended to some to whom the other doth not reach. Now, because this being
established, the opposite interpretation and misapplication of this distinction vanisheth, I shall
briefly confirm it with reasons: –
First, If the application of the good things procured be the end why they are procured, for whose
sake alone Christ doth obtain them, then they must be applied to all for whom they are obtained;
for otherwise Christ faileth of his end and aim, which must not be granted. But that this application
was the end of the obtaining of all good things for us appeareth,– first, Because if it were
otherwise, and Christ did not aim at the applying of them, but only at their obtaining, then might
the death of Christ have had its full effect and issue without the application of redemption and
salvation to any one soul, that being not aimed at, and so, notwithstanding all that he did for us,
every soul in the world might have perished eternally; which, whether it can stand with the dignity
and sufficiency of his oblation, with the purpose of his Father, and his own intention, who "came
into the world to save sinners,– that which was lost," and to "bring many sons unto glory," let all
judge. Secondly, God, in that action of sending his Son, laying the weight of iniquity upon him,
and giving him up to an accursed death, must be affirmed to be altogether uncertain what event
all this should have in respect of us. For, did he intend that we should be saved by it? — then the
application of it is that which he aimed at, as we assert: did he not? — certainty, he was uncertain
what end it should have; which is blasphemy, and exceeding contrary to Scripture and right
reason. Did he appoint a Saviour without thought of them that were to be saved? a Redeemer,
not determining who should be redeemed? Did he resolve of a means, not determining the end?
It is an assertion opposite to all the glorious properties of God.
Secondly, If that which is obtained by any do, by virtue of that action whereby it is obtained,
become his in right for whom it is obtained, then for whomsoever any thing is by Christ obtained,
it is to them applied; for that must be made theirs in fact which is theirs charge; all that he hath
purchased for them must be applied to them, for by virtue thereof it is that they are so saved,
verses 33, 34.
Thirdly, For whom Christ died, for them he maketh intercession. Now, his intercession is for the
application of those things, as is confessed, and therein he is always heard. Those to whom the
one belongs, theirs also is the other. So, John x. 10, the coming of Christ is, that "his might have
life, and have it abundantly;" as also 1 John iv. 9. Heb. x. 10, " By the which will we are
sanctified," — that is the application; "through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ," — that is
the means of impetration: " for by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are
sanctified," verse 14. In brief, it is proved by all those places which we produced rightly to assign
the end of the death of Christ. So that this may be rested on, as I conceive, as firm and
immovable, that the impetration of good things by Christ, and the application of them, respect the
same individual persons.
SECONDLY, We may consider the meaning of those who seek to maintain universal redemption
by this distinction in it, and to what use they do apply it. "Christ," say they, "died for all men, and
by his death purchased reconciliation with God for them and forgiveness of sins: which to some is
applied, and they become actually reconciled to God, and have their sins forgiven them; but to
others not, who, therefore, perish in the state of irreconciliation and enmity, under the guilt of their
sins. This application," say they, "is not procured nor purchased by Christ,– for then, he dying for
all, all must be actually reconciled and have their sins forgiven them and be saved,– but it attends
the fulfilling of the condition which God is pleased to prescribe unto them, that is, believing:"
which, say some, they can do by their own strength, though not in terms, yet by direct
consequence; others not, but God must give it. So that when it is said in the Scripture, Christ hath
reconciled us to God, redeemed us, saved us by his blood, underwent the punishment of our
sins, and so made satisfaction for us, they assert that no more is meant but that Christ did that
which upon the fulfilling of the condition that is of us required, these things will follow. To the
death of Christ, indeed, they assign many glorious things; but what they give on the one hand
they take away with the other, by suspending the enjoyment of them on a condition by us to be
fulfilled, not by him procured; and in terms assert that the proper and full end of the death of
Christ was the doing of that whereby God, his justice being satisfied, might save sinners if he
would, and on what condition it pleased him,– that a door of grace might be opened to all that
would come in, and not that actual justification and remission of sins, life, and immortality were
procured by him, but only a possibility of those things, that so it might be. Now, that all the venom
that lies under this exposition and abuse of this distinction may the better appear, I shall set down
the whole mind of them that use it in a few assertions, that it may be clearly seen what we do
oppose.
First, " God," say they, "considering all mankind as fallen from that grace and favour in Adam
wherein they were created, and excluded utterly from the attainment of salvation by virtue of the
covenant of works which was at the first made with him, yet by his infinite goodness was inclined
to desire the happiness of them, all and every one, that they might be delivered from misery, and
be brought unto himself;" which inclination of his they call his universal love and antecedent will,
whereby he would desirously have them all to be saved; out of which love he sendeth Christ.
Obs. 1. That God hath any natural or necessary inclination, by his goodness, or any other
property, to do good to us, or any of his creatures, we do deny. Every thing that concerns us is an
act of his free will and good pleasure, and not a natural, necessary act of his Deity, as shall be
declared.
Obs 2. The ascribing an antecedent conditional will unto God, whose fulfilling and
accomplishment should depend on any free, contingent act or work of ours, is injurious to his
wisdom, power, and sovereignty, and cannot well be excused from blasphemy; and is contrary to
Rom. ix. 10, "Who hath resisted his will?" I say,–
Obs. 3. A common affection and inclination to do good to all doth not seem to set out the
freedom, fulness, and dimensions of that most intense love of God which is asserted in the
Scripture to be the cause of sending his Son; as John iii. 16, "God so loved the world, that he
gave his only-begotten Son." Eph. i. 9, "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will,
according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself." Col.’i. 19, "It pleased the
Father that in him should all fulness dwell." Rom. v. 8, "God commendeth his love toward us, in
that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." These two I shall, by the Lord’s assistance,
fully clear, if the Lord give life and strength, and his people encouragement, to go through with the
second part of this controversy.
Obs. 4. We deny that all mankind are the object of that love of God which moved him to send his
Son to die; God having "made some for the day of evil," Prov. xvi 4; "hated them before they were
born," Rom. ix. 11, 13; "before of old ordained them to condemnation," Jude 4; being "fitted to
destruction," Rom. ix. 22; "made to be taken and destroyed," 2 Pet. ii. 12; "appointed to wrath," 1
Thess. v. 9; to "go to their own place," Acts i. 25.
Secondly, "The justice of God being injured by sin, unless something might be done for the
satisfaction thereof, that love of God whereby he wouldeth good to all sinners could no way be
brought forth into act, but must have its eternal residence in the bosom of God without any effect
produced."
Obs. 1. That neither Scripture nor right reason will enforce nor prove an utter and absolute want
of power in God to save sinners by his own absolute will, without satisfaction to his justice,
supposing his purpose that so it should be; indeed, it could not be otherwise. But, without the
consideration of that, certainly he could have effected it. It doth not imply any violating of his holy
nature.
Obs. 2. An actual and necessary velleity, for the doing of any thing which cannot possibly be
accomplished without some work fulfilled outwardly of him, is opposite to his eternal blessedness
and all-sufficiency.
Thirdly, "God, therefore, to fulfil that general love and good-will of his towards all, and that it
might put forth itself in such a way as should seem good to him, to satisfy his justice, which stood
in the way, and was the only hinderance, he sent his Son into the world to die."
The failing of this assertion we shall lay forth, when we come to declare that love whereof the
sending of Christ was the proper issue and effect.
Fourthly, " Wherefore, the proper and immediate end and aim of the purpose of God in sending
his Son to die for all men was, that he might, what way it pleased him, save sinners, his justice
which hindered being satisfied," — as Arminius; or, "That he might will to save sinners," — as
Corvinus. "And the intention of Christ was, to make such satisfaction to the justice of God as that
be might obtain to himself a power of saving, upon what conditions it seemed good to his Father
to prescribe."
Obs. 1. Whether this was the intention of the Father in sending his Son or no, let it be judged.
Something was said before, upon the examination of those places of Scripture which describe his
purpose; let it be known from them whether God, in sending of his Son, intended to procure to
himself a liberty to save us if he would, or to obtain certain salvation for his elect.
Obs. 2. That such a possibility of salvation, or, at the utmost, a velleity or willing of it, upon an
uncertain condition, to be by us fulfilled, should be the full, proper, and only immediate end of the
death of Christ, will yet scarcely down with tender spirits.
Obs. 3. The expression, of procuring to himself ability to save, upon a condition to be prescribed,
seems not to answer that certain purpose of our Saviour in laying down his life, which the
Scripture saith was to "save his sheep," and to "bring many sons to glory," as before; nor hath it
any ground in Scripture.
Fifthly, "Christ, therefore, obtained for all and every one reconciliation with God, remission of
sins, life and salvation; not that they should actually be partakers of these things, but that God
(his justice now not hindering) might and would prescribe a condition to be by them fulfilled,
whereupon he would actually apply it, and make them partake of all those good things purchased
by Christ." And here comes their distinction of impetration and application, which we before
intimated; and thereabout, in the explication of this assertion, they are wondrously divided.
Some say that this proceeds so far, that all men are thereby received into a new covenant, in
which redemption Adam was a common person as well as in his fall from the old, and all we
again restored in him; so that none shall be damned that do not sin actually against the condition
where they are born, and fall from the state where into all men are assumed through the death of
Christ. So Bormus, Corvinus; and one of late, in plain terms, that all are reconciled,
redeemed,’saved, and justified in Christ; though how he could not understand (More, p. 10). But
others, more warily, deny this, and assert that by nature we are all children of wrath, and that until
we come to Christ the wrath of God abideth on all, so that it is not actually removed from any: so
the assertors of the efficacy of grace in France.
Again, some say that Christ by this satisfaction removed original sin in all, and, by consequent,
that only; so that all infants, though of Turks and Pagans, out of the covenant, dying before they
come to the use of reason, must undoubtedly be saved, that being removed in all, even the
calamity, guilt, and alienation contracted by our first fall, whereby God may save all upon a new
condition. But others of them, more warily, observing that the blood of Christ is said to "cleanse
from all sin," (1 John i. 7; 1 Pet. i. 18, 19; Isa. liii. 6), say he died for all sinners alike; absolutely
for none, but conditionally for all. Farther, some of them affirm that after the satisfaction of Christ,
or the consideration of it in God’s prescience, it was absolutely undetermined what condition
should be prescribed, so that the Lord might have reduced all again to the law and covenant of
works; so Corvinus: others, that a procuring of a new way of salvation by faith was a part of the
fruit of the death of Christ; so More, p. 35.
Again, some of them, that the condition prescribed is by our own strength, with the help of such
means as God at all times, and in all places, and unto all, is ready to afford, to be performed;
others deny this, and affirm that effectual grace flowing peculiarly from election is necessary to
believing: the first establishing the idol of free-will to maintain their own assertion; others
overthrowing their own assertion for the establishment of grace. So Amyraldus, Camero, etc.
Moreover, some say that the love of God in the sending of Christ is equal to all: others go a
strain higher, and maintain an inequality in the love of God, although he send his Son to die for
all, and though greater love there cannot be than that whereby the Lord sent his Son to die for us,
as Rom. viii. 32; and so they say that Christ purchased a greater good for some, and less for
others. And here they put themselves upon innumerable uncouth distinctions, or rather (as one
calleth them), extinctions, blotting out all sense, and reason, and true meaning of the Scripture.
Witness Testardus, Amyraldus, and, as every one may see that can but read English, in T.
M[ore.] Hence that multiplicity of the several ends of the death of Christ,– some that are the fruits
of his ransom and satisfaction, and some that are I know not what; besides his dying for some so
and so, for others so and so, this way and that way; — hiding themselves in innumerable
unintelligible expressions, that it is a most difficult thing to know what they mean, and harder to
find out their mind than to answer their reasons.
In one particular they agree well enough,– namely, in denying that faith is procured or merited for
us by the death of Christ. So far they are all of them constant to their own principles, for once to
grant it would overturn the whole fabric of universal redemption; but, in assigning the cause of
faith they go asunder again.
Some say that God sent Christ to die for all men, but only conditionally, if they did and would
believe; — as though, if they believed, Christ died for them; if not, he died not; and so make the
act the cause of its own object: other some, that he died absolutely for all, to procure all good
things for them, which yet they should not enjoy until they fulfil the condition that was to be
prescribed unto them. Yet all conclude that in his death Christ had no more respect unto the elect
than others, to sustain their persons, or to be in their room, but that he was a public person in the
room of all mankind.
III. Concerning the close of all this, in respect of the event and immediate product of the death of
Christ, divers have diversely expressed themselves; some placing it in the power, some in the
will, of God; some in the opening of a door of grace; some in a right purchased to himself of
saving whom he pleased; some that in respect of us he had no end at all, but that all mankind
might have perished after he had done all. Others make divers and distinct ends, not almost to be
reckoned, of this one act of Christ, according to the diversity of the persons for whom he died,
whom they grant to be distinguished and differences by a foregoing decree; but to what purpose
the Lord should send his Son to die for them whom he himself had determined not to save, but at
least to pass by and leave to remediless ruin for their sins, I cannot see, nor the meaning of the
twofold destination by some invented. Such is the powerful force and evidence of truth that it
scatter’s all its opposers, and makes them fly to several hiding-corners; who, if they are not willing
to yield and submit themselves, they shall surely lie down in darkness and error. None of these,
or the like intricate and involved impedite distinctions, hath [truth] itself need of; into none of such
poor shifts and devices doth it compel its abettors; it needeth not any windings and turnings to
bring itself into a defensible posture; it is not liable to contradictions in its own fundamentals: for,
without any farther circumstances, the whole of it in this business may be thus summed up: –
" God, out of his infinite love to his elect, sent his dear Son in the fulness of time, whom he had
promised in the beginning of the world, and made effectual by that promise, to die, pay a ransom
of infinite value and dignity, for the purchasing of eternal redemption, and bringing unto himself all
and every one of those whom he had before ordained to eternal life, for the praise of his own
glory." So that freedom from all the evil from which we are delivered, and an enjoyment of all the
good things that are bestowed on us, in our traduction from death to life, from hell and wrath to
heaven and glory, are the proper issues and effects of the death of Christ, as the meritorious
cause of them all; which may, in all the parts of it, be cleared by these few assertions: –
First, The fountain and cause of God’s sending Christ is his eternal love to his elect, and to them
alone; which I shall not now farther confirm, reserving it for the second general head of this whole
controversy.
Secondly, The value, worth, and dignity of the ransom which Christ gave himself to be, and of
the price which he paid, was infinite and immeasurable; fit for the accomplishing of any end and
the procuring of any good, for all and every one for whom it was intended, had they been millions
of men more than ever were created. Of this also afterward. See Acts xx. 28, "God purchased his
church with his own blood." 1 Pet. i. 18, 19, "Redeemed not with silver and gold, but with the
precious blood of Christ;" and that answering the mind and intention of Almighty God, John xiv.
l3, " As the Father gave me commandment, even so I do;" who would have such a price paid as
might be the foundation of that economy and dispensation of his love and grace which he
intended, and of the way whereby he would have it dispensed. Acts xiii. 38, 39, "Through this
man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him all that believe are justified from all
things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." 2 Cor. v. 20, 21, "We are
ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be
ye reconciled to God. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be
made the righteousness of God in him."
Thirdly, The intention and aim of the Father in this great work was, a bringing of those many sons
to glory,– namely, his elect, whom by his free grace he had chosen from amongst all men, of all
sorts, nations, and conditions, to take them into a new covenant of grace with himself, the former
being as to them, in respect of the event, null and abolished; of which covenant Jesus Christ is
the first and chief promise, as he that was to procure for them all other good things promised
therein, as shall be proved.
Fourthly, The things purchased or procured for those persons, — which are the proper effects of
the death and ransom of Christ, in due time certainly to become theirs in possession and
enjoyment,– are, remission of sin, freedom from wrath and the curse of the law, justification,
sanctification, and reconciliation with God, and eternal life; for the will of his Father sending him
for these, his own intention in laying down his life for them, and the truth of the purchase made by
him, is the foundation of his intercession, begun on earth and continued in heaven; whereby he,
whom his Father always hears, desires and demands that the good things procured by him may
be actually bestowed on them, all and every one, for whom they were procured. So that the whole
of what we assert in this great business is exceedingly clear and apparent, without any intricacy
or the leas difficulty at all; not clouded with strange expressions and unnecessary divulsions and
tearings of one thing from another, as is the opposite opinion: which in the next place shall be
dealt withal by arguments confirming the one and everting the other. But because the whole
strength thereof lieth in, and the weight of all lieth on, that one distinction we before spoke of, by
our adversaries diversely expressed and held out, we will a little farther consider that, and then
come to our arguments, and so to the answering of the opposed objections.

CHAPTER V.
Of application and impetration.
The allowable use of this distinction, how it may be taken in a sound sense, the several ways
whereby men have expressed the thing which in these words is intimated, and some arguments
for the overthrowing of the false use of it, however expressed, we have before intimated and
declared. Now, seeing that this is the proton pseudos of the opposite opinion, understood in the
sense and according to the use they make of it, I shall give it one blow more, and leave it, I hope,
a-dying.
I shall, then, briefly declare, that although these two things may admit of a distinction, yet they
cannot of a separation, but that for whomsoever Christ obtained good, to them it might be
applied; and for whomsoever he wrought reconciliation with God, they must actually unto God be
reconciled. So that the blood of Christ, and his death in the virtue of it, cannot be looked on, as
some do, as a medicine in a box, laid up for all that shall come to have any of it, and so applied
now to one, then to another, without any respect or difference, as though it should be intended no
more for one than for another; so that although he hath obtained all the good that he hath
purchased for us, yet it is left indifferent and uncertain whether it shall ever be ours or no: for it is
well known, that notwithstanding those glorious things that are assigned by the Arminians to the
death of Christ, which they say he purchased for all, as remission of sins, reconciliation with God,
and the like, yet they for whom this purchase and procurement is made may be damned, as the
greatest part are, and certainly shall be. Now, that there should be such a distance between
these two,–
First, It is contrary to common sense or our usual form of speaking, which must be wrested, and
our understandings forced to apprehend it. When a man hath obtained an office, or any other
obtained it for him, can it be said that it is uncertain whether he shall have it or no? If it be
obtained for him, is it not his in right, thorough perhaps not in possession? That which is
impetrated or obtained by petition is his by whom it is obtained. It is to offer violence to common
sense to say a thing may be a man’s, or it may not be his, when it is obtained for him; for in so
saying we say it is his. And so it is in the purchase made by Jesus Christ, and the good things
obtained by him for all them for whom he died.
Secondly, It is contrary to all reason in the world, that the death of Christ, in God’s intention,
should be applied to any one that shall have no share in the merits of that death. God’s will that
Christ should die for any, is his intention that he shall have a share in the death of Christ, that it
should belong to him,– that is, be applied to him; for that is, in this case, said to be applied to any
that is his in any respect, according to the will of God. But now the death of Christ, according to
the opinion we oppose, is so applied to all, and yet the fruits of this death are never so much as
once made known to far the greatest part of those all.
Thirdly, [It is contrary to reason] that a ransom should be paid for captives, upon compact for
their deliverance, and yet upon the payment those captives not be made free and set at liberty.
The death of Christ is a ransom, Matt. xx. 28, paid by compact for the deliverance of captives for
whom it was a ransom; and the promise wherein his Father stood engaged to him at his
undertaking to be a Saviour, and undergoing the office imposed on him, was their deliverance, as
was before declared, upon his performance of these things: on that [being done, that] the greatest
number of these captives should never be released, seems strange and very improbable.
Fourthly, It is contrary to Scripture, as was before at large declared. See [also book iii.] chap. x.
But now, all this cur adversaries suppose they shall wipe away with one slight distinction, that will
make, as they say, all we affirm in this kind to vanish; and that is this: "It is true," say they, "all
things that are absolutely procured and obtained for any do presently become theirs in right for
whom they are obtained; but things that are obtained upon condition become not theirs until the
condition be fulfilled. Now, Christ hath purchased, by his death for all, all good things, not
absolutely, but upon condition; and until that condition come to be fulfilled, unless they perform
what is required, they have neither part nor portion, right unto nor possession of them." Also,
what this condition is they give in, in sundry terms; some call it a not resisting of this redemption
offered to them; some, a yielding to the invitation of the gospel; some, in plain terms, faith. Now,
be it so that Christ purchaseth all things for us, to be bestowed on this condition, that we do
believe it, then I affirm that,–
First, Certainly this condition ought to be revealed to all for whom this purchase is made, if it be
intended for them in good earnest. All for whom he died must have means to know that his death
will do them good if they believe; especially it being in his power alone to grant them these means
who intends good to them by his death. If I should entreat a physician that could cure such a
disease to cure all that came unto him, but should let many rest ignorant of the grant which I had
procured of the physician, and none but myself could acquaint them with it, whereby they might
go to him and be healed, could I be supposed to intend the healing of those people? Doubtless
no. The application is easy.
Secondly, This condition of them to be required is in their power to perform, or it is not. If it be,
then have all men power to believe; which is false: if it be not, then the Lord will grant them grace
to perform it, or he will not. If he will, why then do not all believe? why are not all saved? if he will
not, then this impetration, or obtaining salvation and redemption for all by the blood of Jesus
Christ, comes at length to this: — God intendeth that he shall die for all, to procure for them
remission of sins, reconciliation with him, eternal redemption and glory; but yet so that they shall
never have the least good by these glorious things, unless they perform that which he knows they
are no way able to do, and which none but himself can enable them to perform, and which
concerning far the greatest part of them he is resolved not to do. Is this to intend that Christ
should die for them for their good? or rather, that he should die for them to expose them to shame
and misery? Is it not all one as if a man should promise a blind man a thousand pounds upon
condition that he will see.
Thirdly, This condition of faith is procured for us by the death of Christ, or it is not. If they say it
be not, then the chiefest grace, and without which redemption itself (express it how you please) is
of no value, doth not depend on the grace of Christ as the meritorious procuring cause thereof; –
which, first, is exceedingly injurious to our blessed Saviour, and serves only to diminish the
honour and love due to him; secondly, is contrary to Scripture: Tit. iii. 5, 6; 2 Cor. v. 21, "He
became sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." And how we can
become the righteousness of God but by believing, I know not. Yea, expressly saith the apostle,
"It is given to us for Christ’s sake, on the behalf of Christ, to believe in him," Phil. i. 29; "God
blessing us with all spiritual blessing in him," Eph. i 3, whereof surely faith is not the least. If it be
a fruit of the death of Christ, why is it not bestowed on all, since be died for all, especially since
the whole impetration of redemption is altogether unprofitable without it? If they do invent a
condition upon which this is bestowed, the vanity of that shall be afterward discovered. For the
present, if this condition be. So they do not refuse or resist the means of grace, then I ask, if the
fruit of the death of Christ shall be applied to all that fulfil this condition of not refusing or not
resisting the means of grace? If not, then why is that produced 1 If so, then all must be saved that
have not, or do not resist, the means of grace; that is, all pagans, infidels, and those infants to
whom the gospel was never preached.
Fourthly, This whole assertion tends to make Christ but a half mediator, that should procure the
end, but not the means conducing thereunto. So that, notwithstanding this exception and new
distinction, our assertion stands firm,– That the fruits of the death of Christ, in respect of
impetration of good and application to us, ought not to be divided; and our arguments to confirm it
are unshaken.
For a close of all; that which in this cause we affirm may be summed up in this: Christ did not die
for any upon condition, if they do believe; but he died for all God’s elect, that they should believe,
and believing have eternal life. Faith itself is among the principal effects and fruits of the death of
Christ; as shall be declared. It is nowhere said in Scripture, nor can it reasonably be affirmed, that
if we believe, Christ died for us, as though our believing should make that to be which otherwise
was not,– the act create the object; but Christ died for us that we might believe. Salvation,
indeed, is bestowed conditionally; but faith, which is the condition, is absolutely procured. The
question being thus stated, the difference laid open, and the thing in controversy made known,
we proceed, in the next place, to draw forth some of those arguments, demonstrations,
testimonies, and proofs, whereby the truth we maintain is established, in which it is contained,
and upon which it is firmly founded: only desiring the reader to retain some notions in his mind of
those fundamentals which in general we laid down before; they standing in such relation to the
arguments which we shall use, that I am confident not one of them can be thoroughly answered
before they be everted.

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 goodwill
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 111.
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-bewrested,
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. Havi ng 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 notunderstanding
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 vi ndicating, 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 devi l," 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, =91Depart, I never knew you?=92" 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.