|
|
CHAPTER 7
THE REMOVAL OF OTHER REMAINING OBJECTIONS.
THE
removal of some usual sophisms and captious arguments of the
Arminians, of late made common and vulgar, shall be the close of
our treatise, and wind up the whole controversy, which hath drawn
us with violence thus far. And in this performance I shall labor
to be as brief as possible; partly because these things have been
handled at large by others; partly because all color of
opposition to the truth by us maintained from the Scriptures
being removed, all other objections will indeed naturally sink of
themselves. Yet, because great boastings and swelling words of
vanity have been used concerning some that follow, it is
necessary that something be said to show the emptiness of such
flourishes, that the weakest may not be entangled by them.
Objection
1. That which we shall begin withal is an argument of as
great fame and as little merit as any that, in this cause, or
indeed in any other controversy, hath been used of late days; and
it is this: — “That which every one is bound to believe
is true; but every one is bound to believe that Jesus Christ died
for him: therefore it is true, namely, that Jesus Christ died for
every one.”
This
is an argument which, to discover their conviction of the
weakness of the rest of their arguments, the Arminians and their
friends never use, but withal they add some notable encomium of
it, with some terms of affront and threatening to their
adversaries; insomuch as, by consent on both sides, it hath
obtained the name of the Remonstrants’ Achilles. Now, truly,
for my part, as I shall not transcribe any thing hither out of
the many full answers given to it by our divines, by which this
Achilles, or rather Goliath, hath been often cast to the ground,
so I heartily wish that the many operose, prolix answers which
the boasting of our adversaries hath drawn forth had not got,
[for] this poor nothing, more repute a thousand times than its
own strength, or any addition of force from the managers of it
could have procured unto it. Supposing then, first, That the term
“believe,” be used in the same sense in both
propositions (for if otherwise the syllogism is false in the form
of it); secondly, That by believing is understood a
saving application of Christ to the soul, as held out in the
promise, for to believe that Christ died for me in
particular, as is asserted to be the duty of every one, can be
nothing else but such a saving application; thirdly, That
believing that Christ died for any, according to the business in
question, must be with reference to the purpose of the Father and
intention of Jesus Christ himself, for that is it which, with
regard to any universality, is by us opposed; fourthly,
For the term “every one,” it must relate unto all men
as considered in an alike condition, for several respects
and conditions of the same persons may cause them to come under
several obligations unto duties: now, there is no one condition
common unto all but only the state of wrath and death, Ephesians
2:3, and therefore every man must be considered as in that
condition; so that, in sum, the sense of the minor proposition
is, “All men in the world, as considered in a state of wrath
and unregeneracy, are bound to believe, as before described, that
it was the intention of God that Christ should die for every one
of them in particular.”
Now,
not to say any thing to the major proposition, which yet is
false, that which men are bound to believe in this sense being,
as hath been observed by many, neither true nor false, but
good, the assumption is absolutely false, and hath not the
least color of reason or Scripture to support it; and (taking
“every one” for every individual in the world) when our
adversaries prove it, I engage myself to be their proselyte: for,
— First, Then must some be bound to believe that which is
false; which cannot be, every obligation to believe being from
the God of truth. Now, it is false that Christ died for all and
every individual of human kind, as hath been before proved at
large. Secondly, Then should men be bound immediately to believe
that which is not revealed, though divine revelation be
the object of all faith; for the Scriptures do not hold out
anywhere that Christ died for this or that particular man as such,
but only for sinners indefinitely, specified oft-times
antecedently by God’s purpose, and consequently by
their own purchased obedience. Thirdly, Neither, indeed, is the intention
and purpose of God, concerning which we now inquire,
proposed as the object of the faith of any; but only his
commands, promises, and threatenings, — the other being left
to be collected and assured to the soul by an experience and
sense of some sweet infallible issue and effect thereof in the
heart actually enjoyed. Nor, fourthly, can any command in the
Scripture to believe be interpreted by the purpose and intention
of God, as though the meaning of it should be, “God intended
that Christ should die for thee in particular;’’ nor
doth any promise contain that sense. Besides, fifthly, which of
itself is enough to break the neck of this argument, all have not
any such object of faith as Christ’s death at all proposed
to them. How can they believe unless they hear? Can they be bound
to believe that of which they never heard the least rumor? How
many millions of infants and others, in barbarous nations, go to
their “own place” without hearing the least report of
Jesus Christ., or his sufferings for them or others, even in
these days of the gospel! how much more, then, before the coming
of Christ in the flesh, when the means of grace were restrained
to one small nation, with some few proselytes! Were all these,
are they that remain, all and every one, bound to believe that
Christ died for them, all and every one in particular? Those that
think so are, doubtless, bound to go tell all of them so; I mean
those that are yet in the land of the living. Is not unbelief
the great damning sin, where faith is required John 3:36? and
yet doth not Paul prove that many shall be condemned for sinning
against the light of nature, Romans 2:12? an evident
demonstration that faith is not required of all, — all are
not bound to believe.
But
perhaps our adversaries will except, as they must except if they
intend to have any color or show of strength left unto this
argument, that they mean it only in respect of them who are
called by the word, and so it is of force; to which end let it be
thus proposed: — “That which every one called by the
word, to whom the gospel is preached, is bound to believe, is
true; but that Christ died for him in particular, every one so
called is bound to believe: ergo,” etc.
Ans.
1. Only the last exception foregoing is taken off by this reformed
argument; all the rest stand in their full force, which are
sufficient to evert it.
2.
Who seeth not that this very reforming of the argument hath
made it altogether useless to the cause in whose defense it was
produced? for if any one, much more the greatest part of men, be
excepted, which are now excluded from the verge of this
argument, the general ransom falls to the ground. From the
innumerable multitudes of all, we are come to the many
that are called, and doubt not but that we shall instantly descend
to the few that are chosen. Unto the exception, that
that which is true in respect of them to whom it is proposed
would also be true in respect of all if it should be proposed
to them, I answer, by the way, — First, That the argument is
to be taken from the scriptural obligation to believe, and can be
extended no farther than it is actually extended. Secondly, That
it is no safe disputing of what would be or should be, if things
were not as God hath appointed and ordained them. We see the will
of God for the present; neither are we to suppose so as to make
our supposal a bottom for any argument that they could have
been otherwise disposed. Thirdly, That if the gospel should be preached
to all the world, or all in the world, this is all the mind
and will of God that would or can in general be ‘signified
to them by it, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned;” or, that
God hath concatenated and knit these two things together, faith
and salvation, so that whosoever will enjoy the latter
must perform the former. If the gospel should now be preached to
the Turks and the Indians, and they should reject it, certainly
they should be damned for not believing that which they were,
upon the preaching of it, bound to believe. Now, what is this?
that Christ died for every one of them in particular? No,
doubtless; but this, “There is none other name under heaven
given among men, whereby we must be saved,” but only by the
name of Christ, made known to us in the gospel, Acts 4:12. [They
would be damned] for rejecting the counsel and wisdom of God to
save sinners by the blood of Jesus; for not believing the
necessity of a Redeemer, and that Jesus of Nazareth was that
Redeemer, — according to his own word to the Jews, “If
ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins;” as,
indeed, the peculiar infidelity of that people was their not
believing him to be their Messiah, whom they saw to be declared
to be the Son of God with power. The not believing these things
would be the soul-damning infidelity of such obstinate refusers
to come in upon the call of the gospel, and not a refusing to
believe that Christ died for every one of them in particular;
which could not, by the rule of the gospel, be proposed unto
them, and which they never come so far as to question or esteem.
Still,
then, we deny the minor proposition of the reduced syllogism; and
that partly for the reasons before produced, partly for these
subjoined: —
1.
They to whom the gospel is preached are bound to believe with
that faith which is required to justification only. Now, this is
not a full persuasion that Christ died for any one in particular,
in the intention and purpose of God, which revealeth not the
object of justification, nor the way whereby a sinner may be
justified.
2.
Because there is an order, natural in itself, and established
by God’s appointment, in the things that are to be believed;
so that until some of them are believed the rest are not required
(a man is not commanded, nor can he reasonably, to get to the top
of a ladder by skipping all the lower rounds), — namely,
(1.)
Repent, and believe the gospel to be the word of God, to
contain his will, and that Jesus Christ, therein revealed, is the
wisdom and power of God unto salvation.
(2.)
That there is an inseparable connection, by God’s
appointment, between faith and salvation, gospel faith carrying a
sinner quite out of himself and from off his own righteousness
(3.)
That there be a particular conviction, by the Spirit, of the
necessity of a Redeemer to their souls in particular; whereby
they become weary, heavy laden, and burdened.
(4.)
A serious full recumbency and rolling of the soul upon Christ
in the promise of the gospel, as an all-sufficient Savior, able
to deliver and save to the utmost them that come to God by him;
ready, able, and willing, through the preciousness of his blood
and sufficiency of his ransom, to save every soul that shall
freely give up themselves unto him for that end, amongst whom he
is resolved to be. And in doing of all this, there is none called
on by the gospel once to inquire after the purpose and intention
of God concerning the particular object of the death of Christ,
every one being fully assured that his death shall be profitable
to them that believe in him and obey him.
Now,
fourthly, after all this, and not before, it lies upon a believer
to assure his soul, according as he finds the fruit of the death
of Christ in him and towards him, of the goodwill and eternal
love of God to him in sending his Son to die for him in
particular. What a preposterous course, and how opposite to the
rule of the gospel, were it, to call upon a man to believe that
it was the intention and purpose of God that Christ should die
for him in particular, and desire him to assure his soul thereof,
before he be convinced either, —
1.
Of the truth of the gospel in general; or,
2.
That faith is the only way of salvation; or,
3.
That himself standeth in need of a Savior; or,
4.
That there is enough in Christ to save and recover him if he
give up himself unto him in his own way! Now, it is most apparent
that it is only such as these that are bound to believe that
whereof we discourse. The argument, then; must be once again
reformed, and thus proposed: “That which every one,
convinced of the necessity of a Savior, and of the right way of
salvation, hungering, thirsting, and panting after Jesus Christ,
as able alone to give him refreshment, is bound to believe, is
true; but every such a one is bound to believe that Christ died
for him in particular: ergo, it is true.” And some
grant the whole without any prejudice to the cause we have
undertaken to defend. It is most apparent, then, —
1.
That all that are called by the word are not, in what state
or condition soever they continue, bound to believe that Christ
died for them; but only such as are so qualified as before
described.
2.
That the precept of believing, with fiduciary confidence,
that Christ died for any in particular is not proposed nor is
obligatory to all that are called; nor is the non-performance of
it any otherwise a sin, but as it is in the root and habit of
unbelief, or not turning to God in Christ for mercy.
3.
That no reprobate, for whom Christ died not, shall be
condemned for not believing that Christ died for him in
particular, which is not true; but for not believing those things
whereunto he was called, before related, which are all most true,
and that in reference to him.
4.
That the command of believing in Christ, which is especially
urged as given unto all, is not, in that particular contended
about, obligatory unto any but upon fulfilling of the conditions
thereto required.
5.
To “believe on the name of Jesus Christ,” which is
the command, 1 John 3:23, is not to believe that it was the
intention of God that Christ should die for us in particular, but
to rest upon him for salvation, as Isaiah 50:11. Neither, —
6.
Is the testimony of God, to which we ought to set our seal
that it is true, any other but this,
“He
that hath the Son hath life, but he that hath not the Son of God
hath not life,” 1 John 5:12;
which
reprobates disbelieving, do what in them lies to make God a liar,
and are justly condemned for it. He that desireth to see more of
this argument, let him consult, if he please, Piscator, Perkins,
Twisse, Synod of Dort, Du Moulin, Baronius, Rutherford, Spanheim,
Amesius, others, etc.
Obj.
2. “That doctrine which fills the minds and souls of
poor miserable sinners with doubts and scruples whether they
ought to believe or no, when God calls them thereunto, cannot be
agreeable to the gospel. But this doth the doctrine of the
particularity of redemption. It fills the minds of sinners with
scruples and fears whether they may believe or no, and that
because they are uncertain whether it was the intention of God
that Christ should die for them in particular or no, seeing it is
supposed that he died not for all, but only for his elect;
whereupon the soul, when it is called upon to believe, may justly
fall a-questioning whether it will be available or no for him so
to do, and whether it be his duty or no, seeing he knoweth not
whether Christ died for him or no.”
Ans.
1. That scruples, doubts, and fears, the proper issue of
unconquered remaining unbelief, will often arise in the hearts of
sinners, sometimes against, sometimes taking occasion from, the
truth of the gospel, is too evident upon experience. All the
question is, whether the doctrine itself scrupled or stumbled at
do of itself, in its own nature, give cause thereto unto those
who rightly perform their duty? or whether all those fears and
scruples be the natural product and issue of corruption and
unbelief, setting up themselves against the truth as it is in
Jesus? The first we deny, concerning the doctrine of the
particularity of effectual redemption; the latter God alone can
remedy.
2.
This objection supposeth that a man is bound to know and be
persuaded (that is, to believe) that Jesus Christ died by the
appointment of God for him in particular, before he believe in
Jesus Christ. Nay, this they make the bottom of their argument,
that men, according to our persuasion, may scruple whether they
ought to believe or no, because they are not assured before that
Christ died for them in particular, by the designation and
appointment of God. Now, if this be not to involve themselves in
a plain contradiction, I know not what is; for what, I pray, is
it, according to Scripture, for a man to be assured that Christ
died for him in particular? Is it not the very highest
improvement of faith? doth it not include a sense of the
spiritual love of God shed abroad in our hearts? Is it not the
top of the apostle’s consolation, Romans 8:34, and the
bottom of all his joyful assurance, Galatians 2:20? So that they
evidently require that a man must believe before he do believe,
— that he cannot believe, and shall exceedingly fear whether
he ought to do so or no, unless he believe before he believe!
Methinks such removing of scruples were the ready way to entangle
doubting consciences in farther inextricable perplexities.
3.
We deny that a persuasion that it was the will of God that
Christ should die for him in particular either is or can be any
way necessary that a sinner be drawn to believe. For, considering
sinners as such whose duty it is to believe the call of Christ,
Matthew 11:28, Isaiah 4:1; that command of God, 1 John 3:23; that
promise of life upon believing, John in. 36; that threat of
unbelief, ibid; the all-sufficiency of the blood of Christ
to save all believers, Acts 20:21, Ephesians 5:2; the assured
salvation of all believers without exception, Mark 16:16, and the
like, are enough to remove all doubts and fears, and are all that
the Scripture holds out for that purpose.
4.
That persuasion which
(1.)
asserts the certainty of salvation by the death of Christ
unto all believers whatsoever;
(2.)
that affirms the command of God and the call of Christ to be
infallibly declarative of that duty which is required of the
person commanded and called, — which, if it be performed,
will be assuredly acceptable to God;
(3.)
that holds out purchased free grace to all distressed,
burdened, consciences in general;
(4.)
that discovers a fountain of blood, all-sufficient to purge
all the sin of every one in the world that will use the appointed
means for coming unto it; — that doctrine, I say, cannot
possibly be the cause of any doubt or scruple in the minds of
convinced, burdened sinners, whether they ought to believe or no.
Now, all this is held forth by the doctrine of particular
effectual redemption, in the dispensation of the gospel suitable
thereto. I shall, then, let go this objection without farther
pursuit, only attended with this query, What it is that,
according to the authors of universal redemption, men are bound
to believe, when they know beforehand that Christ died for them
in particular? A persuasion of the love of God and good-will of
Christ it cannot be; that they have beforehand, John 3:16; Romans
5:8: nor a coming to God by Christ for an enjoyment of the fruits
of his death; for what is that, I pray? No fruits of the death of
Christ, according to them, but what are common to all; which may
be damnation as well as salvation, for more are damned than
saved, — infidelity as well as faith, for the most are
unbelievers. The immediate fruits of the death of Christ can be
nothing but that which is common to them with those that perish.
Plainly, their faith in Christ will at length appear to be
Socinian obedience.
There
be two things that remain, about which there is no small
contention, both things in themselves excelling and valuable,
both laid claim to by the several persuasions concerning which we
treat; but with such an unequal plea, that an easy judgment might
serve to decide the controversy. Now, these are, first, the
exaltation of God’s free grace, the merit of Christ, and the
consolation of our souls. Let us consider them in order, and let
each persuasion take its due.
Obj.
3. For the first, or the exaltation of God’s free
grace. I know not how it comes to pass, but so it is, men
have entertained a persuasion that the opinion of universal
redemption serveth exceedingly to set forth the love and
free grace of God, yea, they make free grace, that glorious
expression, to be nothing but that which is held forth in this
their opinion, — namely, that God loveth all, and
gave Christ to die for all, and is ready to save all, if
they will come to him. “Herein,” say they, “is
free grace and love magnified indeed; this is the
universality of free grace,” — and such other
flourishing expressions; “whereas the contrary opinion
chains up the love and grace of God to a few.” But stay a
little. What, I pray, is this your grace, free grace, that is
universal? Is it the grace of election? Truly no; God hath not
chosen all to salvation, Romans 9:11,12; Ephesians 1:4; Romans
8:28. Is it the grace of effectual vocation? No, neither.
Doubtless that it cannot be; for “whom God calls he also
justifies,” and “glorifies,” Romans 8:30,
11:25,26,29. Nay, all have not been, are not, outwardly called,
chapter 10:14. Is it the grace of cleansing and sanctification?
Why, are all purged? are all washed in the blood of Jesus? Or is
it the church only, Ephesians 5:25-27. Some, sure, are also
defiled still, Titus 1:15. Faith is the principle of the
heart’s purification, and “all men have not
faith.” Is it the grace of justification, — the free
love and mercy of God in pardoning and accepting sinners? But,
friends, is this universal? Are all pardoned? are all accepted?
see Romans 1:17, 3:22, 5:1. Is it the grace of redemption in the
blood of Christ? see, I pray, Revelation 5:9. What then, I pray,
is this your universal free grace? Is it not universally a
figment of your own brains? or is it not a new name for that old
idol free-will? Is it not destructive to free grace in every
branch of it? Doth it not tend to the eversion of the whole
covenant of distinguishing grace, evidently denying that the
conditions thereof are wrought in any of the federates by virtue
of the promise of the covenant? Are not the two great aims of
their free grace to mock God and exalt themselves? Do not they
propose the Lord as making a pretense of love, good-will, free
grace, and pardon unto all, yet never once acquainting
incomparably the greatest number of them with any such love or
good-will at all, although he know that without his effecting of
it they can never come to any such knowledge? For those that are
outwardly called to the knowledge of these things, do they not,
by their universal grace, feign the Lord to pretend that he loves
them all, has sent his Son to die for them all, and to desire
that they all may be saved, yet upon such a condition as, without
him, they can no more effect than to climb to heaven by a ladder,
which yet he will not do? Do not they openly make God to say,
“Such is this my love, my universal grace, that by it I will
freely love them, I dare joyfully embrace them, in all things but
only that which will do them good?” Would not they affirm
him to be a grossly counterfeiting hypocrite that should go to a
poor blind man, and tell him, “Alas, poor man, I pity thy
case, I see thy want, I love thee exceedingly; open thine eyes,
and I will give thee a hundred pounds?” And dare they assign
such a deportment to the most holy God of truth? Is their
universal grace any thing but a mock? Did that ever do good to
any, as to salvation, which is common to all? Are they not the
two properties of the grace of God in the Scripture, that it is
discriminating and effectual? And is not their grace any thing
else but these? Let it be granted that all is true which they say
concerning the extent of grace; is it such grace as that ever any
soul was saved by? Why, I pray, then, are not all?
“Why,” they will say, “because they do not
believe.” So, then, the bestowing of faith is no part of
this free grace. See your second aim, even to exalt yourselves
and your free-will into the room of grace; or, at least, leaving
it room to come in, to have the best share in the work of
salvation,—namely, believing itself, that makes all the rest
profitable. See, now, what your universality of free grace leads
and tends to. Are not the very terms opposite to one another? In
a word, to bring in reprobates to be objects of free grace, you
deny the free grace of God to the elect; and to make it
universal, you deny it to be effectual. That all may have a share
of it, they deny any to be saved by it; for saving grace must be
restrained.
On
the other side; in what one tittle, I pray you, doth the doctrine
of the effectual redemption of God’s elect only, in the
blood of Jesus, impair the free grace of God? Is it in its freedom?
Why, we say it is so free, that if it be not altogether free
it is no grace at all. Is it in its efficacy? Why, we say
that by grace we are saved, ascribing the whole work of our
recovery and bringing to God, in “solidum,” thereto. Is
it in its extent? We affirm it to be extended to every one
that is, was, or ever shall be delivered from the pit. It is
true, we do not call grace that goeth into hell free grace, in a
gospel notion; for we deem the free grace of God so powerful,
that wherever it hath designed and chosen out itself a subject,
that it brings God, and Christ, and salvation with it, to
eternity.
“But
you do not extend it unto all; you tie it up to a few.” De
te largitor, puer. Is the extending of the love and favor of
God in our power? Hath he not mercy on whom he will have mercy,
and doth he not harden whom he will? Yet, do not we affirm that
it is extended to the universality of the saved ones? Should we
throw the children’s bread to dogs? Friends, we believe that
the grace of God in Christ worketh faith in every one to whom it
is extended; that the conditions of that covenant which is
ratified in his blood are all effectually wrought in the heart of
every covenantee; that there is no love of God that is not
effectual; that the blood of Christ was not shed in vain; that of
ourselves we are dead in trespasses and sins, and can do nothing
but what the free grace of God worketh in us: and, therefore, we
cannot conceive that it can be extended to all. [As] for
you, who affirm that millions of those that are taken into a new
covenant of grace do perish eternally, that it is left to men to
believe that the will of God may be frustrate and his love
ineffectual, that we distinguish ourselves one from another,
— you may extend it whither you please, for it is
indifferent to you whether the objects of it go to heaven or to
hell. But in the meanwhile, I beseech you, friends, give me leave
to question whether this you talk of be God’s free grace, or
your fond figment? his love, or your wills? for truly, for the
present, it seems to me the latter only. But yet our prayers
shall be that God would give you infinitely more of his love than
is contained in that ineffectual universal grace wherewith you so
flourish. Only, we shall labor that poor souls be not seduced by
you with the specious pretences of free grace to all, — not
knowing that this your free grace is a mere painted cloth, that
will give them no assistance at all to deliver them from that
condition wherein they are, but only give them leave to be saved
if they can; whereas they are ready, by the name you have given
to the brat of your own brain, to suppose you intend an
effectual, almighty, saving grace, that will certainly bring all
to God to whom it is extended, of which they have heard in the
Scripture; whilst you laugh in your sleeves, to think how simply
these poor souls are deluded with that empty show, the substance
whereof is this, “Go your ways; be saved if you can, in the
way revealed; God will not hinder you.”
Obj.
4. Each party contests about the exaltation of the merit
of Christ; for so are their mutual pretences. Something hath
been said to this before, so that now I shall be brief. Take,
then, only a short view of the difference that is between them,
where each pretends to exalt the merit of Christ in that which is
by the other denied, and this plea will suddenly be at an end.
There
is but one only thing that concerns the death of Christ in which
the authors of the general ransom are upon the
affirmative, and whereby they pretend to set forth the excellency
of his death and oblation, namely, that the benefits thereof axe
extended unto all and every one, whereas their adversaries
straiten it unto a few, a very few, — none but the elect;
which, they say, is derogatory to the honor of the Lord Jesus
Christ. And this is that wherein they pretend so exceedingly to
advance his name and merit above the pitch that they aim at who
assert the effectual redemption of the elect only. The truth is,
the measure of the honor of Jesus Christ is not to be assigned by
us, poor worms of the dust; that he takes to be honor which he
gives and ascribes unto himself, and nothing else. He hath no
need of our lie for his glory: so that if this did, in our
eyes, seem for the exaltation of the glory of Christ, yet,
arising from a lie of our own hearts, it would be an abomination
unto him. Secondly, We deny that this doth any way serve to set
out the nature and dignity of the death of Christ; because the
extent of its efficacy to all (if any such thing should be) doth
not arise from its own innate sufficiency, but from the free
pleasure and determination of God: which how it is enervated by a
pretended universality was before declared. Thirdly, The value of
a thing ariseth from its own native sufficiency and worth unto
any purpose whereunto it is to be employed; which the maintainers
of effectual redemption do assert, in the death of Christ, to be
much above what any of their adversaries ascribe unto it.
Should
I now go about to declare in how many things the honor of Christ,
and the excellency of his death and passion, with the fruits of
it, is held forth in that doctrine which we have sought to open
from the Scriptures, above all that can be assigned to it
agreeable to their own principal maxims who maintain universal
redemption (and that according to truth itself), I should be
forced to repeat much that hath already been spoken, so that it
shall suffice me to present the reader with this following
antithesis: — Universalists.
1.
Christ died for all and every one, elect and reprobate.
2.
Most of them for whom Christ died are damned.
3.
Christ, by his death, purchased not any saving grace for them
for whom he died.
4.
Christ took no care for the greatest part of them for whom he
died, that ever they should hear one word of his death.
5.
Christ, in his death, did not ratify nor confirm a covenant
of grace with any federates, but only procured by his death that
God might, if he would, enter into a new covenant with whom he
would, and upon what condition he pleased.
6.
Christ might have died, and yet no one be saved.
7.
Christ had no intention to redeem his church, any more than
the wicked seed of the serpent.
8.
Christ died not for the infidelity of any. Scriptural
Redemption.
1.
Christ died for the elect only.
2.
All those for whom Christ died are certainly saved.
3.
Christ by his death purchased all saving grace for them for
whom he died.
4.
Christ sends the means and reveals the way of life to all
them for whom he died.
5.
The new covenant of grace was confirmed to all the elect in
the blood of Jesus.
6.
Christ, by his death, purchased, upon covenant and compact,
an assured peculiar people, the pleasure of the Lord prospering
to the end in his hand.
7.
Christ loved his church, and gave himself for it.
8.
Christ died for the infidelity of the elect. Divers other
instances of the like nature might be easily collected, upon the
first view whereof the present difference in hand would quickly
be determined. These few, I doubt not, are sufficient, in the
eyes of all experienced Christians, to evince how little the general
ransom conduceth to the honor and glory of Jesus Christ, or
to the setting forth of the worth and dignity of his death and
passion.
Obj.
5. The next and last thing which comes under debate in this
contest is gospel consolation, which God in Christ is
abundantly willing we should receive. A short disquisition
whether of the two opinions treated on doth give the firmest
basis and soundest foundation hereunto, will, by the Lord’s
assistance, lead us to an end of this long debate. THE GOD OF
TRUTH AND COMFORT GRANT THAT ALL OUR UNDERTAKINGS, OR RATHER HIS
WORKINGS IN US, FOR TRUTH, MAY END IN PEACE AND CONSOLATION! To
clear this, some things are to be premised; as,—
1.
All true evangelical consolation belongeth only to believers,
Hebrews 6:17,18, — God’s people, Isaiah 40:1,2; upon
unbelievers the “wrath of God abideth,” John 3:36.
2.
To make out consolation unto them to whom it is not due is no
less a crime than to hide it from them to whom it doth belong,
Isaiah 5:20; Jeremiah 23:14; Ezekiel 13:10.
3.
T. M[ore]’s attempt to set forth the death of Christ so
that all might be comforted, meaning all and every one in the
world, as appeareth, is a proud attempt to make that straight
which God hath made crooked, and most opposite to the gospel.
4.
That doctrine which holds out consolation from the death of
Christ to unbelievers, cries, “Peace, peace,” when God
says, “There is no peace.” These things being premised,
I shall briefly demonstrate these four following positions:
—
1.
That the extending of the death of Christ unto a
universality, in respect of the object, cannot give the least
ground of consolation to them whom God would have to be comforted
by the gospel
2.
That the denying of the efficacy of the death of Christ
towards them for whom he died cuts the nerves and sinews of all
strong consolation, even such as is proper to believers to
receive, and peculiar to the gospel to give.
3.
That there is nothing in the doctrine of redemption of the
elect only that is yet in the least measure to debar them from
consolation to whom comfort is due.
4.
That the doctrine of the effectual redemption of the sheep of
Christ, by the blood of the covenant, is the true solid
foundation of all durable consolation.
1.
Begin we with the first, — that the extending of the
death of Christ unto a universality, in respect of the
object, hath nothing in it, as peculiar unto it, that can give
the least ground of consolation unto them whom God would have to
be comforted. That gospel consolation, properly so called, being
a fruit of actual reconciliation with God, is proper and peculiar
only to believers, I laid down before, and suppose it to be a
truth out of all question and debate. Now, that no consolation
can be made out to them as such, from any thing which is peculiar
to the persuasion of a general ransom, is easily proved by these
following reasons: —
(1.)
No consolation can arise unto believers from that which is
nowhere in the Scripture proposed as a ground, cause, or matter
of consolation, as the general ransom is not: for, — first,
That which hath no being can have no affection nor operation;
secondly, All the foundations and materials of consolation are
things particular, and peculiar only to some, as shall be
declared.
(2.)
No consolation can accrue unto believers from that which is
common unto them with those whom, — first, God would not
have comforted; secondly, that shall assuredly perish to
eternity; thirdly, that stand in open rebellion against Christ;
fourthly, that never hear one word of gospel or consolation. Now,
to all these, and such as these, doth the foundation of consolation,
as proposed with and arising from the general ransom, equally
appertain with the choicest of believers.
(3.)
Let a man try in the time, not of disputation, but of
desertion and temptation, what consolation or peace to his soul
he can obtain from such a collection as this, “Christ died
for all men; I am a man: therefore, Christ died for me.”
Will not his own heart tell him, that notwithstanding all that he
is assured of in that conclusion, the wrath of God may abide on
him for evermore? Doth he not see that, notwithstanding this, the
Lord showeth so little love unto millions of millions of the sons
of men, of whom the former collection (according to the present
opinion) is true as well as of himself, as that he doth not once
reveal himself or his Son unto them? What good will it do me to
know that Christ died for me, if notwithstanding that I may
perish for ever? If you intend me any consolation from that which
is common unto all, you must tell me what it is which all enjoy
which will satisfy my desires, which are carried out after
assurance of the love of God in Christ. If you give me no more to
comfort me than what you give, or might have given, to Judas, can
you expect I should receive settlement and consolation?
Truly,
miserable comforters are ye all, physicians of no value,
Job’s visitors, — skillful only to add affliction unto
the afflicted. “But be of good comfort,” will Arminians
say; “Christ is a propitiation for all sinners, and now thou
knowest thyself so to be.” Ans. True; but is Christ a
propitiation for all the sins of those sinners? If so, how can
any of them perish? If not, what good will this do me, whose sins
perhaps (as unbelief) are such as for which Christ was not a
propitiation? “But exclude not thyself; God excludeth none;
the love which caused him to send his Son was general towards
all.” Tell not me of God’s excluding; I have
sufficiently excluded myself. Will he powerfully take me in? Hath
Christ not only purchased that I shall be admitted, but procured
me ability to enter into his Father’s arms? “Why, he
hath opened a door of salvation to all.” Alas! is it not a
vain endeavor, to open a grave for a dead man to come out?
Who lights a candle for a blind man to see by? To open a door for
him to come out of prison who is blind, and lame, and bound, yea
dead, is rather to deride his misery than to procure him liberty.
Never tell me that will yield me strong consolation, under the
enjoyment whereof the greatest portion of men perish
everlastingly.
2.
The opinion concerning a general ransom is so far from
yielding firm consolation unto believers from the death of
Christ, that it quite overthrows all the choice ingredients
of strong consolation which flow there hence; and that, —
first, By strange divisions and divulsions of one thing from
another, which ought to be conjoined to make up one certain
foundation of confidence; secondly, By denying the efficacy of
his death towards them for whom he died: both which are necessary
attendants of that persuasion.
First,
They so divide the impetration of redemption and the application
thereof, — the first being in their judgments the only
proper immediate fruit and effect of the death of Christ, —
that the one may belong to millions who have no share in the
other; yea, that redemption may be obtained for all, and yet no
one have it so applied unto them as to be saved thereby. Now, the
first of these, such as it is, is an ineffectual possible
redemption, notwithstanding which all the sons of men might
perish everlastingly, being the whole object of the death of
Christ (as is asserted), separated and divided from all such
application of redemption unto any as might make it profitable
and useful in the least measure (for they deny this application
to be a fruit of the death of Christ; if it were, why is it not
common to all for whom he died?) What comfort this can in the
least degree afford to any poor soul will not dive into my
apprehension. “What shall I do?’ saith the sinner;
“the iniquity of my heels compasseth me about. I have no
rest in my bones by reason of my sin: and now, whither shall I
cause my sorrow to go?” Be of good cheer; Christ died for
sinners. “Yea, but shall the fruits of his death be
certainly applied unto all them for whom he died? If not, I may
perish for ever.” Here let them that can, answer him,
according to the principles of Universalists, without sending him
to his own strength in believing, or that which, in the close,
will be resolved into it, “et erit mihi magnus
Apollo:’ and if they send him thither, they acknowledge the
consolation concerning which they boast properly to proceed from
ourselves, and not from the death of Christ.
Secondly, Their separating between the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ makes little for the consolation of believers, yea, indeed, quite everts it. There are, amongst others, two eminent places of Scripture wherein the Holy Ghost holdeth forth consolation to believers, against these two general causes of all their troubles and sorrows, — namely, their afflictions and their sins. The first is Romans 8:32-34, the other 1 John 2:1,2; in both which places the apostles make the bottom of the consolation which they hold out to believers in their afflictions and failings to be that strait bond and inseparable connection that is between these two, with the identity of their objects, — namely, the oblation and intercession of Jesus Christ. Let the reader consult both the texts, and he shall find that on this lies the stress, and herein consists the strength, of the several proposals for the consolation of believers; which, in both places, is principally intended. A more direct undertaking for this end and purpose cannot be produced. Now, the authors of universal redemption do all of them divide and separate these two; they allow of no connection between them, nor dependence of one upon another, farther than is effected by the will of man. His oblation they stretch to all; his intercession to a few only. Now, the death of Christ, separated from his resurrection and intercession, being nowhere proposed as a ground of consolation, yea, positively declared to be unsuitable to any such purpose, 1 Corinthians 15:14, certainly they who hold it out as so done are no friends to Christian consolation. Thirdly, Their denial of the procurement of faith, grace, holiness, — the whole intendment of the new covenant, — and perseverance therein, by the death and blood-shedding of Jesus Christ, unto all them, or any of them, for whom he died, doth not appear to be so suitable an assertion for to raise consolation from his cross as is vainly pretended. I pray, what solid consolation can be drawn from such dry breasts as from whence none of these things do flow? That they have not immediate dependence on the death of Christ, according to the persuasion of the assertors of universal grace, hath been before declared, and is by themselves not only confessed, but undertaken to be proved. Now, where should a soul look for these things, but in the purchase of Christ? Whence should they flow, but from his side? Or is there any consolation to be had without them? Is not the strongest plea for these things, at the throne of grace, the procurement of the Lord Jesus? What promise is there of any thing without him? Are not all the promises of God yea and amen in him? Is there any attainment of these things in our own strength? Is this the consolation you afford us, to send us from free grace to free will? Whither, I pray, according to this persuasion, should a poor soul go that finds himself in want of these things? “To God, who gives all freely.” But doth God bless us with any spiritual blessings but only in Jesus Christ? Doth he bless us with any thing in him but what he hath procured for us? Is not all grace as well procured by as dispensed in a Mediator? Is this a way to comfort a soul, and that from the death of Christ, to let him know that Christ did not procure those things for him without which he cannot be comforted? “Credat Apella.”
It
is, then, most apparent, that the general ransom (which is
pretended) is so far from being the bottom of any solid
consolation unto them whose due it is, that it is directly
destructive of, and diametrically opposed unto, all those ways
whereby the Lord hath declared himself willing that we should
receive comfort from the death of his Son, drying up the breast
from whence, and poisoning the streams whereby, it should be
conveyed unto our souls.
3.
The next thing we have to do is, to manifest that the
doctrine of the effectual redemption of the elect only by the
blood of Jesus is not liable to any just exception as to this
particular, nor doth any way abridge believers of any part or
portion of that consolation which God is willing they should
receive. That alone which, by the opposers of it, with any color
of reason, is objected (for as for the exclamation of shutting
out innumerable souls from any share in the blood of Christ,
seeing confessedly they are reprobate unbelievers and persons
finally impenitent, we are not at all moved at it), comes to this
head: — “That there is nothing in the Scripture whereby
any man can assure himself that Christ died for him in
particular, unless we grant that he died for all.”
First,
That this is notoriously false, the experience of all believers
who, by the grace of God, have assured their hearts of their
share and interest in Christ as held out unto them in the
promise, without the least thought of universal redemption, is a
sufficient testimony. Secondly, That the assurance arising from a
practical syllogism, whereof one proposition is true in the word,
and the second by the witness of the Spirit in the heart, is
infallible, hath hitherto been acknowledged by all. Now, such
assurance may all believers have that Christ died for them, with
an intention and purpose to save their souls. For instance: all
believers may draw out the truth of the word and the faith
created in their hearts into this conclusion: — [First,] “Christ
died for all believers,” — that is, all who choose him
and rest upon him as an all-sufficient Savior; not that he died
for them as such, but that all such are of those for whom he
died. He died not for believers as believers, though he died for
all believers; but for all the elect as elect, who, by the
benefit of his death, do become believers, and so obtain
assurance that he died for them. [As] for such of those that are
elected who are not yet believers, though Christ died for them,
yet we deny that they can have any assurance of it whilst they
continue such. You suppose it a foul contradiction, if a man
should be said to have assurance that Christ died for him in
particular, and yet continue an unbeliever. This first
proposition, as in the beginning laid down, is true in the word,
in innumerable places. Secondly, The heart of a believer,
in the witness of the Spirit, assumes, “But I believe in
Christ;” that is, “I choose him for my Savior, cast and
roll myself on him alone for salvation, and give up myself unto
him, to be disposed of unto mercy in his own way.” Of the
truth of this proposition in the heart of a believer, and the
infallibility of it, there are also many testimonies in the word,
as is known to all; from whence the conclusion is,
“Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ died for me in particular,
with an intention and purpose to save me.”
This
is such a collection as all believers, and none but believers,
can justly make, so that it is peculiar to them alone; and unto
those only is this treasure of consolation to be imparted. The
sufficiency of the death of Christ for the saving of every one,
without exception, that comes unto him, is enough to fill all the
invitations and entreaties of the gospel unto sinners, to induce
them to believe; which when, by the grace of Christ, they do,
closing with the promise, the fore-mentioned infallible assurance
of the intention and purpose of Christ to redeem them by his
death, Matthew 1:21, is made known unto them. Now, whether this
be not a better bottom and foundation for a man to assure his
soul unto rest and peace upon, than that reasoning which our
opposers in this business must, suitably to their own principles,
lay as a common stone, — namely, “Christ died for all
men; I am a man: therefore Christ died for me,” — let
any man judge; especially considering that indeed the first
proposition is absolutely false, and the conclusion, if it could
be true, yet, according to their persuasion, can be no more
ground of consolation than Adam’s fall. All this is spoken
not as though either one opinion or other were able of itself to
give consolation, which God alone, in the sovereignty of his free
grace, can and doth create; but only to show what principles are
suitable to the means whereby he worketh on and towards his elect.
4.
The drawing of gospel consolation from the death of Christ,
as held out to be effectual towards the elect only, for
whom alone he died, should close up our discourse; but
considering, first, how abundantly this hath been done by divers
eminent and faithful laborers in the vineyard of the Lord
already; secondly, how it is the daily task of the preachers of
the gospel to make it out to the people of God; thirdly, how it
would carry me out, besides my purpose, to speak of things
in a practical, so atheological way, having
designed this discourse to be purely polemical; and,
fourthly, that such things are no more expected nor welcome to
wise and learned men, in controversies of this nature, than
knotty, crabbed, scholastic objections in popular sermons and
doctrinal discourses, intended merely for edification, — I
shall not proceed therein. Only, for a close, I desire the reader
to peruse that one place, Romans 8:32-34; and I make no doubt but
that he will, if not infected with the leaven of the error
opposed, conclude with me, that if there be any comfort, any
consolation, any assurance, any rest, any peace, any joy, any
refreshment, any exultation of spirit, to be obtained here below,
it is all to be had in the blood of Jesus long since shed, and
his intercession still continued; as both are united and
appropriated to the elect of God, by the precious effects and
fruits of them both drawn to believe and preserved in believing,
to the obtaining of an immortal crown of glory, that shall not
fade away.
Mo>nw|
sofw~| Qew|~, dia< Ihsou~ Cristou~ hJ do>xa eijv tou<v
aijw~nav. JAmh>n.