And as for the other part of the objection, namely, that these had made

a right improvement of Christ’s redemption: the reply that may be given

to it, is, that none but Christ’s friends can be said to have made a

right improvement of redemption, and therefore none but such have any

ground to conclude that Christ died for them: but this is not the temper

and character of the greater part of mankind, therefore Christ did not

die for the whole world: and it is very evident, from this character

which Christ gives of them, for whom he died, that either they are, or

shall be, of enemies, made friends to him.

3. They are called, _The Children of God that were scattered abroad_,

who should be _gathered together in one_, as the consequence of his

death, in John xi. 52. This gathering together in one, seems to import

the same thing, with what the apostle speaks of, as a display of the

grace of the gospel, and calls it, their _being gathered together in

Christ_ their Head, in Eph. i. 10. and one part of them he considers, as

being already _in heaven_, and the other part of them _on earth_, in

their way to it; and he speaks such things concerning them, in the

foregoing and following verses, as cannot be said of any but those that

shall be saved. Now, if Christ designed, by his death, to purchase this

special privilege for his children, certainly it cannot be supposed that

he died for the whole world; and elsewhere the apostle speaking, in Heb.

ii. 10. concerning _the Captain of our salvation’s being made perfect

through sufferings_ considers this as a means for _bringing many sons to

glory_, which is a peculiar privilege belonging to the heirs of

salvation, and not to the whole world.

_Object. 1._ It will be objected to this, that nothing can be proved

from the words of so vile a person as Caiaphas, who relates this matter;

and therefore, though it be contained in scripture, it does not prove

the truth of the doctrine, which is pretended to be established thereby.

_Answ._ Though Caiaphas was one of the vilest men on earth, and he

either did not believe this prophecy himself, or, if he did, he made a

very bad use of it, yet this does not invalidate the prediction: for

though wicked men may occasionally have some prophetic intimation

concerning future events, as Balaam had, the instrument, which the

Spirit of God makes use of in discovering them to mankind, does not

render them less certain, for the worst of men may be employed to impart

the greatest truths: therefore it is sufficient to our purpose, that it

is said, in the words immediately foregoing, that _being high priest

that year, he prophesied_, as it was no uncommon thing for the high

priest to have prophetic intimations from God, to deliver to his people,

whatever his personal character might be; so that we must consider this

as a divine oracle, and therefore infallibly true.

_Object. 2._ If it be allowed, that what is here predicted was true, yet

the subject-matter thereof respects the nation of the Jews, concerning

whom it cannot be said, that every individual was in a state of

salvation, and therefore it rather militates against, than proves the

doctrine of particular redemption.

_Answ._ It is evident, that when it is said that _Christ should die for

that nation_, the meaning is, the children of God in that nation; for

the children of God, that dwelt there, are opposed to his children that

were scattered abroad; and so the meaning is, Christ died that they

should not perish, who have the temper, and disposition of his children,

wherever the place of their residence be.

4. They for whom Christ died are called his _church_, whereof he is _the

Head_; and _the Body_, of whom _he is the Saviour_, in Eph. v. 23. and

these he is said _to have loved, and given himself for_, in ver. 25. Now

the church is distinguished from the world, as it is gathered out of it;

and the word _church_, in this place, is taken in a very different

sense, from that in which it is understood in many other scriptures. The

apostle does not mean barely a number of professing people, of which

some are sincere, and others may be hypocrites, or of which some shall

be saved, and others not; nor does he speak of those who are apparently

in the way of salvation, as making a visible profession of the Christian

religion: But it is taken for that church, which is elsewhere called

_the spouse of Christ_, and is united to him by faith, and that shall,

in the end, be eternally saved by him; this is very evident, for he

speaks of them, as _sanctified and cleansed with the washing of water by

the word_, in ver. 26. And, as to what concerns their future state, they

are such as shall be _presented to himself a glorious church, not having

spot or wrinkle, or any such thing_, in ver. 27. Now, since it was for

these that Christ died, it cannot be reasonably concluded that he died

equally and alike for all mankind.

And to this we may add, that they are called _his people_, whom he

designed _to save from their sins_, in Matt. i. 21. and also _a peculiar

people_, who are described by this character, by which they are known,

as being _zealous of good works_, in Tit. ii. 14. and, by his death,

they are said not only to be redeemed, so as to be put into the

possession of the external privileges of the gospel, but _redeemed from

all iniquity_, and purified unto himself; all which expressions

certainly denote those distinguishing blessings which Christ, by his

death, designed to purchase for those who are the objects thereof.

II. That Christ did not die equally, and alike for all mankind, appears

from his death’s being an instance of the highest love, and they, who

are concerned herein, are in a peculiar manner, obliged to bless him for

it as such. Thus the apostle joins both these together, when he says in

Gal. ii. 20. _He loved me, and gave himself for me_; and elsewhere it is

said, in Rev. i. 5. _He loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own

blood_; and herein it _is_ said, that _God commendeth his love towards

us_, in Rom. v. 8. as that which is without a parallel. And besides,

when he speaks of this love of Christ expressed herein, he seems to

distinguish it from that common love which is extended to all, when he

says, Christ died _for us_; and, that we may understand what he means

thereby, we must consider to whom it was that this epistle was directed,

namely, to such as were _beloved of God, called to be saints_, in chap.

i. 7. They are also described as such, who _were justified by Christ’s

blood_, and _who should be saved from wrath through him; reconciled to

God by the death of his Son, and who should be saved by his life_; and,

as such, who _joyed in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, and by him had

received the atonement_, in chap. 9-11. therefore surely they, who were

thus beloved by Christ, to whom he expressed his love by dying for them,

must be distinguished from the world. And our Saviour speaks of this, as

far exceeding all that love, which is in the breasts of men, to one

another, in John xv. 18. _Greater love hath no man than this, that a man

should lay down his life for his friends._ Therefore we have no reason

to suppose that he died equally and alike for all, for then there would

be an equal instance of love herein to the best and worst of men; Judas

would have been as much beloved as Peter; the Scribes and Pharisees,

Christ’s avowed enemies and persecutors, as much beloved as his

disciples and faithful followers, if there be nothing discriminating in

his dying love. Therefore we must conclude that he died to procure some

distinguishing blessings for a part of mankind, which all are not

partakers of.

And, as this love is so great and discriminating, it is the

subject-matter of the eternal praise of glorified saints: The _new song_

that is sung to him, in Rev. v. 9. contains in it a celebrating of his

glory, as having _redeemed them to God by his blood, out of every

kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation_, who were admitted into his

immediate presence, as the objects of his distinguishing love. And

certainly all this implies more than his purchasing the

gospel-dispensation, or the discovery of the way of salvation to

mankind, of whom the greatest part neglect, despise, and reap no saving

advantage thereby.

III. There are some circumstances attending the death of Christ, which

argue, that it was not designed for all the world: particularly, he died

as a Surety, or as one who undertook to pay that debt, which the justice

of God might have exacted of men in their own persons. This has already

been proved; and that which may be inferred from hence, is, that if

Christ, by dying, paid this debt, and when he rose from the dead,

receiving a discharge from the hand of justice, then God will not exact

the debt twice, so as to bring them under the condemning sentence of the

law, whom Christ, by his death, has delivered from it: this is certainly

a privilege that does not belong to the whole world, but to the

sanctified.

Moreover, some are not justified or discharged for the sake of a ransom

paid, and never shall be; therefore it may be concluded, that it was not

given for them.

IV. It farther appears, that Christ did not die equally and alike for

all men, in that he designed to purchase that dominion over, or

propriety in them, for whom he died, which would be the necessary result

hereof. As they are his trust and charge, given into his hand, to be

redeemed by his blood; (and, in that respect, he undertook to satisfy

the justice of God for them, which he has done hereby) so, as the result

hereof, he acquired a right to them, as Mediator, by redemption;

pursuant to the eternal covenant between the Father and him, he obtained

a right to bestow eternal life on all that were given to, and purchased

by him. This tends to set forth the Father’s glory, as he designed

hereby to recover and bring back fallen creatures to himself; and it

redounds to Christ’s glory, as Mediator; as herein he not only discovers

the infinite value of his obedience and sufferings, but all his redeemed

ones are rendered the monuments of his love and grace, and shall for

ever be employed in celebrating his praise: But certainly this is

inconsistent with his death’s being ineffectual to answer this end, and

consequently he died for none but those whom he will bring to glory,

which he could not be said to have done, had he laid down his life for

the whole world.

V. That Christ did not die, or pay a price of redemption for all the

world, farther appears, in that, salvation, whether begun, carried on,

or perfected, is represented, in scripture, as the application thereof;

and all those graces, which are wrought by the Spirit in believers, are

the necessary result and consequence thereof. This will appear, if we

consider, that when Christ speaks of his _Spirit_, as _sent to convince

of sin, righteousness, and judgment, and to guide_ his people _into all

truth_ he says, _He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine, and

shall shew it unto you_, John xvi. 14. the meaning of which is, that he

should apply what he had purchased, whereby his glory, as our Redeemer,

would be eminently illustrated; and elsewhere, when the apostle speaks

of the Spirit’s work of regeneration and sanctification, he considers it

as the result of Christ’s death, and accordingly it is said to be _shed

on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour_, Tit. iii. 6. And

when we read of his _redeeming them that were under the law_, their

receiving the _adoption of sons_, Gal. iv. 5. and all the privileges

contained in it, these are considered as the necessary consequences

thereof; and Christ’s being _not spared_, but _delivered up_ unto death

for those who are described as chosen, called, justified, and such as

shall be hereafter glorified, is assigned, as a convincing evidence,

that _God will with him freely give them all things_, Rom. viii. 32. Now

this cannot, with the least shadow of reason, be applied to the whole

world; therefore Christ did not die for, or redeem, all mankind.

That the application of redemption may farther appear to be of equal

extent with the purchase thereof, we shall endeavour to prove, that all

those graces, which believers are made partakers of here, as well as

complete salvation, which is the consummation thereof hereafter, are the

purchase of Christ’s death. And herein we principally oppose those who

defend the doctrine of universal redemption, in that open and

self-consistent way, which the Pelagians generally take, who suppose,

that faith and repentance, and all other graces, are entirely in our own

power; otherwise the conditionality of the gospel-covenant, as they

rightly observe, could never be defended, and they, for whom Christ

died, namely, all mankind, must necessarily repent and believe. Thus a

late writer[170] argues, in consistency with his own scheme; whereas

some others, who maintain the doctrine of universal redemption, and, at

the same time, that of efficacious grace, pluck down with one hand, what

they build up with the other. It is the former of these that we are now

principally to consider, when we speak of the graces of the Spirit, as

what are purchased by Christ’s blood; and, that this may appear, let it

be observed,

1. That complete salvation is styled, _The purchased possession_, Eph.

i. 14. and our _deliverance from the wrath to come_, is not only

inseparably connected with, but contained in it, and both these are

considered as purchased by the death of Christ, 1 Thess. i. 10. Rom. v.

9, 10. and the apostle elsewhere, speaking concerning the church, as

arrived to its state of perfection in heaven, and its being _without

spot or wrinkle or any such thing_, and _without blemish_, that is, when

its sanctification is brought to perfection, considers this, as the

accomplishment of that great end of Christ’s _giving himself for it_, or

laying down his life to purchase it, Eph. v. 25, 27.

2. It follows, from hence, that all that grace, whereby believers are

made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light,

which is the beginning of this salvation, is the purchase of Christ’s

blood. Accordingly God is said to have _blessed us with all spiritual

blessings in heavenly places_, (or, as it may be better rendered, in

what _concerns heavenly things_) _in Christ_, Eph. i. 3. that is, for

the sake of Christ’s death, which was the purchase thereof; therefore it

follows, that faith and repentance, and all other graces, which are

wrought in us in this world, are purchased thereby: Thus it is said,

_Unto you it is given in behalf of Christ to believe_, as well as to

exercise those graces, which are necessary in those who are called _to

suffer for his sake_, Phil. i. 29. and elsewhere God is said to have

_exalted Christ to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance_, as

well as _forgiveness of sins_, Acts v. 31. And, since his exaltation

includes in it his resurrection from the dead, it plainly argues, that

he died to give repentance, and consequently that this grace was

purchased by him; and when our Saviour speaks of _sending_ the Spirit,

_the Comforter to convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of

judgment_, which comprizes in it that internal work of grace that is

wrought by him, he considers this as the consequence of his leaving the

world, after he had finished the work of redemption by his death, and so

purchased this privilege for them, John xvi. 7, 8.

VI. That Christ did not die for all mankind, appears from his not

interceding for them, as he saith, _I pray not for the world, but for

them which thou hast given me, for they are thine_; and not for his

disciples alone, _but for them also which should believe on him through

their word_, John xvii. 9, 20. This farther appears from a believer’s

freedom from condemnation being founded on Christ’s _intercession_, as

well as his _death_ and _resurrection_, Rom. viii. 34. and his being, at

the same time, styled an _Advocate with the Father_, and _a propitiation

for our sins_, 1 John ii. 1, 2.

And this may be farther argued from the nature of Christ’s intercession,

which (as will be considered in its proper place[171]) is his presenting

himself, in the merit of his death, in the behalf of those for whom he

suffered; as also from his being _always heard_ in that which he pleads

for, John xi. 42. which argues that they shall be saved, otherwise it

could not be supposed that he intercedes for their salvation: but this

he cannot be said to do for all mankind, as appears by the event, in

that all shall not be saved.

_Object._ To this it is objected that Christ prayed for his enemies, as

it was foretold concerning him, by the prophet, who saith, _He made

intercession for the transgressors_, Isa. liii. 12. and this was

accomplished at his crucifixion, when he saith, _Father, forgive them,

for they know not what they do_, Luke xxiii. 34. That which Christ here

prayed for, was forgiveness, which is a privilege connected with

salvation; and this he did in the behalf of the multitude that crucified

him: but it cannot reasonably be supposed, that all these were saved:

therefore if Christ’s death and intercession respects the same persons,

and necessarily infers their salvation, then it would follow, that this

rude and inhuman multitude were all saved, which they, who deny

universal redemption do not suppose.

_Answ._ Some, in answer to this objection, suppose, that there is a

foundation for a distinction between those supplications, which Christ,

in his human nature, put up to God, as being bound, by the moral law, in

common with all mankind, to pray for his enemies; and his Mediatorial

prayer or intercession. In the former of these respects, he prayed for

them; which prayer, though it argued the greatness of his affection for

them, yet it did not necessarily infer their salvation; in like manner,

as Stephen, when dying, is represented as praying for those who stoned

him, when he saith, _Lord, lay not this sin to their charge_, Acts vii.

80. or, as our Saviour prays for himself in the garden, _O, my Father,

if it be possible, let this cup pass from me_, Matt. xxvi. 39. whereby

he signifies the formidableness of the death he was to undergo, and that

his human nature could not but dread such a degree of suffering: this

they suppose to be different from his Mediatorial intercession for his

people, in which he represents the merit of his death, as what would

effectually procure the blessings purchased thereby; in this latter

sense, he could not be said to pray for any of those who crucified him,

who are excluded from salvation.

But, since this reply to the objection hath some difficulties attending

it, which render it less satisfactory, especially because it supposes

that he was not heard in that which he prayed for, when he desired that

God would _forgive them_, I would rather chuse to take another method in

answering it; namely, that when Christ prays that God would _forgive

them_, he means that God would not immediately pour forth the vials of

his wrath upon that wicked generation, as their crime deserved, but that

they might still continue to be a people favoured with the means of

grace; this he prays for, and herein was answered; and his intercession

for them, though it had not an immediate respect to the salvation of all

of them, had, notwithstanding, a subserviency to the gathering in of his

elect amongst them, whose salvation was principally intended by this

intercession, as it was for them that he shed his blood; and accordingly

I apprehend, that this desire that God would _forgive them_, implies the

same thing as Moses’s request, in the behalf of Israel, did, when he

saith, _Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this people, as thou

hast forgiven this people from Egypt, until now_, Numb. xiv. 19. where

to pardon intends nothing else but God’s not punishing them as their sin

deserved, in an immediate, and exemplary way and manner.

VII. The doctrine of universal redemption hath some absurd consequences

attending it, not consistent with the divine perfections; as,

1. It would give occasion for Christ to be called the Saviour of those

who shall not be eventually saved by him, the Redeemer of many, who are

held in chains by the justice of God, and receive no saving benefit by

his redemption, or for him to be said to express the highest instance of

love, in dying for those who shall for ever be the objects of his

hatred, which implies a contradiction; and what is this but to say, that

he delivers those from _the wrath to come_, 1 Thess. i. 10. who are, and

shall be for ever, children of wrath? therefore we must either assert

universal salvation, or deny universal redemption.

2. It will also follow from hence, that he satisfied the justice of God

for all the sins of all men; for to lay down a price of redemption, is

to discharge the whole debt, otherwise it would be to no purpose. Now,

if he satisfied for all the sins of every man, he did this that no sin

should be their ruin, and consequently he died to take away the guilt of

final impenitency in those who shall perish; and therefore they have, by

virtue hereof, a right to salvation, which they shall not obtain: it

follows then, that since he did not die for all the sins of all men, he

did not, by his death, redeem all men.

3. If Christ died for all men, he intended hereby their salvation, or

that they should live: but it is certain he did not intend the salvation

of all men; for then his design must be frustrated with respect to a

part of them, for whom he died, which contains a reflection on his

wisdom, as not adapting the means to the end. Moreover, this supposes

that Christ’s attaining the end he designed by his death, depends on the

will of man, and consequently it subjects him to disappointment, and

renders God’s eternal purpose dependent on man’s conduct.

4. Since God designed, by the death of Christ, to bring to himself a

revenue of glory, in proportion to the infinite value thereof, and

Christ, our great Mediator, was, as the prophet saith, to have _a

portion with the great_, and to _divide the spoil with the strong_, as

the consequence of his _pouring out his soul unto death_, Isa. liii. 12.

it follows from thence, that if all are not saved, for whom Christ died,

then the Father and the Son would lose that glory which they designed to

attain hereby, as the work would be left incomplete; and a great part of

mankind cannot take occasion from Christ’s redeeming them, to adore and

magnify that grace, which is displayed therein, since it is not

eventually conducive to their salvation.

Having endeavoured to prove the doctrine of particular redemption; we

shall now consider the arguments generally brought by those who defend

the contrary scheme, who suppose, that God designed, as the consequence

of Christ’s death, to save all mankind, upon condition of their

repenting and believing, according to the tenor of the gospel-covenant,

which is substituted in the room of that which was violated by man’s

apostacy from God, whereby sincere obedience comes in the room of that

perfect obedience, which was the condition of the first covenant. This

they call man’s being brought into a salvable state by Christ’s death;

so that Christ rendered salvation possible; whereas faith, repentance,

and sincere obedience, render it certain. And, so far as this concerns

the design of God, in sending Christ to redeem the world, they suppose

that God determined hereby to put man into such a state, that all may be

saved, if they will.

And, as to what concerns the event, to wit, man’s complying with the

condition, they that defend universal redemption are divided in their

sentiments about it; some supposing that Christ purchased faith and

repentance for a certain number of mankind, namely, those who shall

repent and believe, and pursuant thereunto, will work those graces in

them; whereas others, who had not these graces purchased for them, shall

perish, though Christ has redeemed them. These suppose, that redemption

is both universal and particular, in different respects; _universal_, in

that all who sit under the sound of the gospel, have a conditional grant

of grace contained therein, whereby they are put into a salvable state,

or possibility of attaining salvation; and _particular_, with respect to

those who shall repent and believe, and so attain salvation; in which

sense they apply that scripture, in which God is said to be _the Saviour

of all men, especially of those that believe_, 1 Tim. iv. 10. This some

call a middle way, between the Pelagian and Calvinistic methods of

reasoning about this subject; but it appears to be inconsistent with

itself, inasmuch as they, who give into this hypothesis, are forced

sometimes to decline what they have been contending for on one side,

when pressed with some arguments brought in defence of the other;

therefore we shall pass this over, and consider the self-consistent

scheme, in which universal redemption is maintained,

The sum of all their arguments, who defend it in the Pelagian way,

amounts to this, _viz._ that Christ died not to purchase salvation

absolutely for any, but to make way for God’s entering into a new or

gospel covenant with men, in which salvation is promised, on condition

of faith, repentance, and sincere obedience, which they suppose to be in

the power of those who have the gospel. And, that the heathen may not be

excluded, though it cannot be styled a gospel-covenant to them, there

are abatements made, as to what concerns faith, founded on divine

revelation, and the only condition that entitles them to salvation is

their yielding sincere obedience to the law of nature, in proportion to

their light.

They farther add, that this gospel-covenant must be conditional,

otherwise it could not be called a _covenant_, as wanting an essential

ingredient contained in every covenant; and these conditions must be in

our own power, otherwise the overture of salvation, depending on the

performance thereof, would be illusory; and it could not be called a

covenant of grace, inasmuch as there can be no grace, or favour, in

promising a blessing upon impossible conditions; neither could this

gospel-covenant be styled a better covenant than that which God entered

into with our first parents, in which the conditions were in their own

power; nor could it be an expedient to repair the ruins of the fall, or

bring man, in any sense, into a salvable state. So that, according to

this representation of the doctrine of particular redemption, there are

not only many absurd consequences attending it, which detract from the

glory of the gospel, but it is contrary to the holiness, wisdom,

justice, and goodness of God, and so derogates as much from the divine

perfections, as any thing that is argued in defence of universal

redemption can be pretended to do. And, to sum up the whole argument,

there is an appeal to scripture, as that which gives countenance to it

in a multitude of instances. This is the substance of all that is said

in defence of this doctrine; and, in opposition to it, We shall take

leave to observe,

(1.) That it is taken for granted, but not sufficiently proved, that

Christ died to purchase the covenant of grace; whereas, if the

difference between the covenant of redemption, and the covenant of

grace, be only circumstantial, as has been before observed,[172] then

the death of Christ is included among the conditions of this covenant;

and if so, the covenant itself could not be the purchase thereof: but,

if by Christ’s purchasing the covenant of grace, they only meant his

purchasing the graces given in the covenant, we are far from denying it,

though they generally do. That therefore which we are principally to

oppose, is their sense of the conditionality of the covenant of grace,

and its being essential to a covenant to be conditional, namely, to

depend on uncertain conditions, in our power to perform, it being as

they suppose, left to the freedom of our own will to comply with or

reject them, and thereby to establish or disannul this covenant: but

having elsewhere proved that the word _covenant_ is often used in

scripture, without the idea of a condition annexed to it,[173] and also

considered in what respects those ideas, contained in a conditional

covenant between man and man, are to be excluded, when we speak of a

covenant between God and man;[174] and having also, in maintaining the

doctrine of election, endeavoured to defend the absoluteness of God’s

will, and shewed in what sense we are to understand those scriptures

that are laid down in a conditional form,[175] which may, with a little

variation, be applied to our present argument; we shall, to avoid the

repetition of things before insisted on, add nothing farther in answer

to this part of the argument, we are now considering, but only that it

implies God to be, in many respects, like ourselves, and supposes that

it is in our power to frustrate, and render the death of Christ, which

was the highest display of divine grace, ineffectual, and so prevent his

having that glory, which he designed to bring to his own name thereby.

(2.) As to what is farther argued, concerning the covenant of grace

being a better covenant than that which God made with man in innocency,

and therefore that the conditions thereof must be in our own power,

otherwise God, by insisting on the performance of what is impossible,

subverts the design of the gospel, and the covenant hereupon ceases to

be a covenant of grace; it may be replied that though we freely own that

the covenant of grace is, in many respects, better than that which God

entered into with man in innocency, and that it would not be so were it

impossible for those, who are concerned therein, to attain the blessings

promised to the heirs of salvation; yet we cannot allow that it must

necessarily be conditional, in the sense in which some understand the

word, much less that the conditions thereof are in our own power, or

else the design of the gospel must be concluded to be subverted.

Therefore we may take leave to observe, that when God is said to require

faith, and all other graces in this covenant-dispensation, and has

connected them with salvation, this does not overthrow the grace of the

covenant, but rather establish it; for grace and salvation are not only

purchased for, but promised and secured to all who are redeemed, by the

faithfulness of God, and the intercession of Christ and shall certainly

be applied to them; and whereas, the graces of the Spirit are not in our

own power, this is so far from overthrowing the design of the gospel,

that it tends to advance the glory thereof, as God hereby takes occasion

to set forth the exceeding riches of his grace, in making his people

meet for, and bringing them, at last, to glory. And, though it be not

possible for all to attain salvation, this should he no discouragement

to any one to attend on those means of grace, under which we are to hope

for the saving effects of Christ’s death, whereby we may conclude that

eternal life is purchased for us, and we shall at last be brought to it.

(3.) As to what is farther alleged, concerning the covenant of grace, as

designed to repair the ruins of the fall, or God’s intending hereby to

bring man into a salvable state; we are never told, in scripture, that

what was lost by our first apostasy from God, is to be compensated by

the extent of grace and salvation to all mankind; and it is not the

design of the gospel to discover this to the world, but that the

exceeding riches of divine grace should be _made known to the vessels of

mercy, before prepared unto glory_, Rom. ix. 23. This is, as some

express it, the plank that remains after the ship-wreck,[176] or the

great foundation of our hope, and possibility of escaping everlasting

destruction; and it is a much better ground of security, than to lay the

whole stress of our salvation on the best improvements of corrupt

nature, or those endeavours which we are to use, to improve the liberty

of our will, in order to our escaping ruin, without dependance on the

divine assistance; which is the method that they take to attain

salvation, who thus defend the doctrine of universal redemption.

(4.) As for our being brought into a salvable state by the death of

Christ; the gospel no where gives all mankind ground to expect

salvation, but only those who have the marks and characters of Christ’s

redeemed ones; and these are not brought by his death unto a mere

possibility of attaining it, but the scripture represents them as having

the _earnest, or first fruits_ thereof, and speaks of _Christ in them_,

as _the hope of glory_, Eph. i. 14. Rom. viii. 23. They are also said to

be _reconciled to God by the death of his Son_, chap. v. 10. which is

more than their having a bare possibility of salvation, as the result

and consequence thereof.

(5.) That which is next to be considered, is, what concerns the doctrine

of particular redemption, as being derogatory to the divine perfections,

together with many absurd consequences, which are supposed to attend it.

It is very common, in all methods of reasoning, and particularly in

defending or opposing the doctrine of universal redemption, for persons

to endeavour to make it appear, that the contrary scheme of doctrine is

chargeable with absurdities; and, as we have taken the same method in

opposing universal redemption, it may reasonably be expected, that the

doctrine of particular redemption should have many absurd consequences

charged upon it; to which we shall endeavour to reply, that thereby it

may be discerned whether the charge be just or no. And,

1. The doctrine of particular redemption is supposed to be inconsistent

with the goodness of God, as it renders salvation impossible to the

greatest part of mankind, and their state irretrievable by any means

that can be used, and so has a tendency to lead them to despair. But to

this it may be replied,

_1st_, That it must be owned, that they, for whom Christ did not die,

cannot be saved; and therefore, had God described any persons by name,

or given some visible character, by which it might be certainly

concluded that they were not redeemed, it would follow from thence, that

their state would be desperate. But this is not his usual method of

dealing with mankind: he might, indeed, have done it, and then such

would have been thereby excluded from, and not encouraged to attend on

the means of grace; but he has, in wisdom and sovereignty, concealed the

event of things, with respect hereunto, from the world; and therefore

there is a vast difference between men’s concluding that a part of the

world are excluded from this privilege; and that they themselves are

included in that number: the latter of which we have no warrant to say,

concerning ourselves, or any others, especially so long as we are under

the means of grace. There is, indeed, one character of persons in the

gospel, which gives ground to conclude that Christ did not die for them,

and that is what respects those who had committed the unpardonable sin.

I shall not, at present, enter into the dispute, whether that sin can

now be committed or no, since we may be occasionally led to insist on

that subject under another head; but there seems to be sufficient ground

to determine, either that this cannot be certainly known, since the

extraordinary gift of discerning of spirits is now ceased; or, at least,

that this cannot be applied to any who attend on the means of grace with

a desire of receiving spiritual advantage thereby.

_2dly_, If Christ’s not dying for the whole world be a means to lead men

to despair, as salvation is hereby rendered impossible, this consequence

may, with equal evidence, be deduced from the supposition, that all

mankind shall not be saved, which they, who defend universal redemption,

pretend not to deny: but will any one say, that this supposition leads

men to despair? or ought it to be reckoned a reflection on the divine

goodness, that so many are left to perish in their fallen state, by the

judicial hand of God, which might have applied salvation unto all, as

well as purchased it for all mankind?

2. The doctrine of particular redemption is farther supposed to be

inconsistent with the preaching the gospel, which is generally styled a

door of hope; and then the dispensation we are under cannot be called a

day of grace; which renders all the overtures of salvation made to

sinners illusory, and contains in it a reflection, not only on the grace

of God, but his holiness.

In order to our replying to this, something must be premised to explain

what we mean by a day of grace, and the hope of the gospel, which

accompanies it. And here, let it be considered,

(1.) That we hereby intend such a dispensation in which sinners are

called to repent and believe, and so obtain salvation; not that we are

to suppose that it is to be attained by their own power, without the

special influences of the Holy Ghost, for this would be to ascribe that

to man, which is peculiar to God; nor that God would give his special

grace to all that sit under the sound of the gospel; for this is

contrary to common observation and experience, since many make a

profession of religion who are destitute of saving grace.

As for the hope of the gospel, or that door of hope that is opened

therein to sinners, we cannot understand any thing else thereby, but

that all, without distinction, are commanded and encouraged to wait on

God in his instituted means of grace, and the event hereof must be left

to him who gives and withholds success to them, as he pleases. All have

this encouragement, that, peradventure they may obtain grace, under the

means of grace; and this is not inconsistent with their being styled a

door of hope, and God is not obliged to grant sinners a greater degree

of hope than this, to encourage them to wait on him in his ordinances,

notwithstanding there is a farther motive inducing us hereunto, namely,

that this is his ordinary way, in which he works grace; or, if God is

pleased to give us desires after the efficacy of his grace, or any

degree of conviction of sin and misery; this is still a farther ground

of hope, though it fall short of that grace of hope that accompanies

salvation.

(2.) As to what concerns the preaching of the gospel, and the overtures

of salvation to all therein, which, upon the supposition of Christ’s not

dying for all men, they conclude to be illusory, and repugnant to the

holiness of God. To this it may be replied, that we do not deny that in

preaching the gospel, Christ is offered to the chief of sinners, or that

the proclamation of grace is made public to all, without distinction:

but this will not overthrow the doctrine of particular redemption, if we

rightly consider what is done, in offering Christ to sinners; which,

that it may be understood, let it be observed,

_1st_, That God has given us no warrant to enter into his secret

determinations, respecting the event of things, so as to give any

persons ground to conclude that they are redeemed, and have a warrant to

apply to themselves the promise of salvation, or any blessings that

accompany it, while in an unconverted state. Ministers are not to

address their discourses to a mixed multitude of professing Christians,

in such a way, as though they knew that they were all effectually

called, and chosen of God. Our Saviour compares them to _the faithful

and wise steward_, whose business it is _to give every one their portion

of meat in due season_, Luke xii. 42. and therefore they are,

consistently with what is contained in scripture, to tell them, that

salvation is purchased for a part of mankind, and they know not but that

they may be of that number, which will be an evidence to them that they

are so.

_2dly_, When Christ is said to be offered to sinners, in the preaching

of the gospel, that, which is intended thereby, is his being set forth

therein as a most desirable object, altogether lovely, worthy to be

embraced, and submitted to; and not only so, but that he will certainly

save all whom he effectually calls, inasmuch as he has purchased

salvation for them.

_3dly_, It includes in it an informing sinners, that it is their

indispensible duty and interest to believe in Christ, and in order

thereto, that they are commanded and encouraged to wait on him for that

grace, which can enable them thereunto: and, as a farther encouragement,

to let them know that there is a certain connexion between grace and

salvation; so that none, who are enabled, by faith, to come to Christ,

shall be cast out, or rejected by him. This is the preaching and hope of

the gospel; and, in this sense, the overtures of salvation are made

therein; which is not in the least inconsistent with the doctrine of

particular redemption.[177]

_Object._ Though this be such a method of preaching the gospel, as is

consistent with the doctrine of special redemption; yet there is another

way of preaching it, which is more agreeable to the express words of

scripture, and founded on the doctrine of universal redemption; and

accordingly sinners ought to be told, that the great God, in the most

affectionate manner, expostulates with them, to persuade them to accept

of life and salvation, when he represents himself, as _having no

pleasure in the death of the wicked_, and, with an earnestness of

expression says, _Turn ye, turn ye, from your evil ways; for why will ye

die, O house of Israel?_ Ezek. xxxiii. 11. Therefore the design of the

gospel is, to let the world know that God’s dealing with mankind, in

general, are full of goodness; he would not have any perish, and

therefore has sent his Son to redeem them all, and, as the consequence

hereof, pleads with them to turn to him, that they may reap the benefits

purchased thereby.

_Answ._ Whatever be the sense of these expostulatory expressions, which

we frequently meet with in scripture, we must not suppose that they

infer, that the saving grace of repentance is in our own power; for that

is not only contrary to the sense of many other scriptures, but to the

experience of every true penitent, whose language is like that of

Ephraim, _Turn thou me, and I shall be turned_, Jer. xxxi. 18. nor must

we conclude, that God designs to save those that shall not be saved; for

then he could not say, _My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my

pleasure_, Isa. xlvi. 10. If these ideas, as unworthy of God, be

abstracted from the sense of such-like scriptures, we may understand

them, not only in a way that is consistent with the divine perfections,

but with the doctrine of particular redemption; which, that it may

appear, let it be considered, that it is a very common thing, in

scripture, for God to condescend to use human modes of speaking, and

those, in particular, by which various passions are set forth;

notwithstanding, we must not conclude that these passions are in God as

they are in men. Such expostulations as these, when used by us, signify,

that we earnestly desire the good of others, and are often warning them

of their danger: but all is to no purpose, for they are obstinately set

on their own ruin, which we can by no means prevent; it being either out

of our power to help them, or, if we could, it would not redound to our

honour to do it. This draws forth such-like expostulations from men; but

the weakness contained in them, is by no means to be applied to God: it

cannot be said to be out of his power to give grace to impenitent

sinners; nor, in case he has so determined, will it tend to his

dishonour to bestow it. Now, that we may understand the sense of these

scriptures, let it be considered,

1. That _life_ and _death_, in scripture, are oftentimes used to signify

the external dispensations of providence, as to what concerns that good

or evil, which God would bring on his people: thus it is said, _See, I

have set before thee this day, life and good, death and evil_, Deut.

xxx. 15, 19, 20. where _life_ is explained in the following words, as

signifying their being _multiplied and blessed in the land, whither they

were to go to possess it_; and when God advises them in a following

verse, _to choose life_, the consequence of this is, that _both they and

their seed should live, that they might dwell in the land, which the

Lord sware to their fathers to give them_; and elsewhere, when God says,

by the prophet Jeremiah, _I set before you the way of life, and the way

of death_, Jer. xxi. 8. he explains it in the following words, as

containing an expedient for their escaping temporal judgments, when he

says, _He that abideth in the city, shall die by the sword, and by the

famine, and by the pestilence; but he that goeth out, and falleth to the

Chaldeans, shall live_. And I cannot see any reason to conclude, but

that many other expressions, of the like nature, in which God promises

life, or threatens death to the house of Israel, by the prophets, who

often warned them of their being carried into captivity, and dying in

their enemies’ land, have a more immediate respect thereunto; and that

proverbial expression, which the Israelites are represented as making

use of, _The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the childrens’ teeth

are set on edge_, Ezek. xviii. 2. seems to intimate no more than this;

_q. d._ that our fathers have sinned, and thereby deserved that the

nation should be ruined by being carried captive, and we must suffer for

their sins; in answer to which, God tells them, that this proverb should

not be used by them, but this evil should be brought on them for their

own iniquities, or prevented by their reformation, namely, by forsaking

their _idolatry_, _whoredom_, _violence_, _oppression_, and other

abominations. And then he adds, ver. 12, 13, 17, 18. _the soul that

sinneth, it shall die_, that is, if you continue to commit these vile

enormities, you shall be followed with all those judgments which shall

tend to your utter ruin; but _if the wicked will turn from all his sins

which he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die_, ver.

21. If this be the sense of these and such-like texts, then it was not

wholly out of their own power thus to turn to God, how much soever that

special grace, which accompanies salvation, be out of our power. It is

one thing to say, that man cannot work a principle of grace in himself,

or to do that by his own power, which is the special gift and work of

the Spirit of God, and, as the consequence thereof, have ground to

expect eternal salvation; and another thing to say, that he cannot

abstain from some gross enormities, as an expedient to prevent

desolating judgments. But if it will not be allowed that this is the

sense of all those scriptures, that promise or threaten _life_ or

_death_, which I do not pretend peremptorily to assert, let it be

farther added,

2. That if spiritual and eternal blessings be included in the word

_life_, and the contrary in _death_, in the scriptures but now referred

to, we may account for the sense of them, without supposing that God

designs what shall never come to pass, to wit, the universal salvation

of mankind, though a part of them shall not be saved, by considering

desire, in him, as signifying the effects of desire in men.[178] Thus

God’s not desiring a thing, denotes it not to be the object of desire;

accordingly when he desires not the death of sinners, it implies, that

they ought to endeavour to avoid it, as the most formidable evil; and,

on the other hand, his taking pleasure in a thing, as he does in the

salvation of his people, signifies not only his intending to save them,

but the inexpressible happiness which they shall attain thereby; and,

when he exhorts them, as an expedient to attain this privilege, _to

turn_, this signifies the inseparable connexion between salvation and

repentance, or turning to God, which, though it be God’s gift, it is,

notwithstanding, our act and indispensible duty. Therefore, if we take

this, and such-like scriptures, in either of these two senses, they are

far from giving countenance to the doctrine of universal redemption.

3. There is another absurd consequence charged upon the doctrine of

special redemption, namely, that it is inconsistent with our being

exhorted and encouraged to _repent and believe for the remission of

sins_, or _to the saving of the soul_, as scripture gives all men a

warrant to do, Acts ii. 38. and since all are commanded to exercise

these graces, and to expect salvation, as connected therewith, the

doctrine of particular redemption, as a late writer insinuates, puts us

under a necessity of believing a lie. And he farther adds, that if the

condition, annexed to the promise of salvation, be impossible, and known

to be so, it gives no encouragement to set about it; and, if he who

promises knows it to be so, he promises nothing, because nothing that a

person can obtain, or be the better for, whereby he is deluded, and a

cheat put upon him, by pretending kindness, in making the promise, and

intending no such thing.[179] Thus that author represents the doctrine

of particular redemption, as containing the most blasphemous

consequences that words can express: he must therefore have been very

sure that his argument was unanswerably just, though, I hope, we shall

be able to make it appear that it is far from being so; which, that we

may do, let it be considered,

(1.) That we are to distinguish between a person’s being bound to

believe in Christ, and to believe that Christ died for him; the first

act of faith does not contain in it a person’s being persuaded that

Christ died for him, but that he is the Object of faith, as he is

represented to be in scripture; and accordingly it supposes that we are

convinced that Christ is the Messiah, that he purchased salvation for

all who shall attain it, and is able to save, unto the utmost, all that

come unto God by him; and also, that it is our duty and interest so to

do. And, since saving faith is not in our own power, but the work and

gift of divine grace, we are encouraged to wait on God in his

ordinances, and, with fervent prayer, to beseech him that he would work

this grace in us, acknowledging, that if he should deny us this

blessing, there is no unrighteousness in him; and we are to continue

waiting on him, and using all those means which are in our power, though

they cannot attain their end, without his blessings; and, when he is

pleased to work this grace in us, we shall be enabled to put forth

another act of faith, which is properly saving, as intended by the

scripture, which speaks of _believing to the saving of the soul_, which

consists in receiving of him, and resting on him for salvation, as

hoping that he hath died for us, inasmuch as he hath given us that

temper and disposition of soul, which is contained in that character

which is given of those for whom Christ died.

(2.) We must farther distinguish between God’s commanding all that sit

under the sound of the gospel to believe in Christ; and his giving them

ground to expect salvation, before they believe in him. Faith and

repentance may be asserted to be duties incumbent on all, and demanded

of them, when, at the same time, it doth not follow that all are given

to expect salvation, upon the bare declaration that they are so.

Accordingly the command and encouragement is to be considered in this

order; first, as it respects our obligation to believe; and then, as it

respects our hope of salvation; and neither the former nor the latter of

these does, in the least, infer that God intended to save all mankind,

or gave them ground to expect salvation, who do not believe in Christ.

(3.) As to what is farther suggested, concerning salvation’s being

promised on such conditions, as are known, both by God and man, to be

impossible, the only answer that need be given to this, is, that though

_with men this is impossible, yet with God all things are possible_,

Matt. xix. 26. When we consider faith and repentance, as conditions

connected with salvation, or as evincing our right to claim an interest

in Christ, and that salvation, which is purchased by him, in which

sense, as was before observed, we do not oppose their being called

conditions thereof, by those who are tenacious of that mode of

speaking;[180] and we do not call them impossible conditions, any

otherwise than as they are so, without the powerful energy of the Holy

Spirit; we cannot think that our asserting, that it is impossible that

all mankind should thus repent and believe, is a doctrine contrary to

scripture, which gives us ground to conclude, that all men shall not be

saved, and consequently that all shall not _believe to the saving of the

soul_. And, when we consider the impossibility thereof, we do not

suppose that God has given all mankind ground to expect this saving

faith, upon which the blasphemous suggestion, relating to his deluding

men, is founded; it is enough for us to say, that God has not told any

one, who attends on his ordinances, in hope of obtaining this grace,

that he will not give him faith; and more than this need not be desired

by persons to induce them to perform this duty, while praying and

waiting for the happy event thereof, to wit, our obtaining these graces,

and so being enabled to conclude that Christ has died for us.

4. If all the absurdities before mentioned will not take place to

overthrow the doctrine of particular redemption, there is another

argument, which they, who oppose it, conclude to be unanswerable,

namely, that it does not conduce so much to advance the grace of God, as

to assert that Christ died for all men, inasmuch as more are included

herein, as the objects of divine favour, therefore God is hereby more

glorified.

To this it may be replied, that it does not tend to advance the divine

perfections, to suppose that God designed to save any that shall perish,

for that would be to argue, as has been before considered, that the

purpose of God, with respect to the salvation of many, is frustrated.

But, since the stress of the argument is laid on the display of the

glory of divine grace; that does not so much consist in the extent of

the favour, with respect to a greater number of persons, as it does in

its being free and undeserved, and tending, for this reason, to lay the

highest obligation on those who are concerned herein, which is the most

known sense of the word _grace_.

But inasmuch as it will be objected, that this is only a criticism,

respecting the sense of a word, it may be farther replied to it, that if

the grace, or goodness of God, be more magnified by universal, than

particular redemption, as including more, who are the objects thereof,

the same method of reasoning would hold good, and they might as well

attempt to prove, that there must be an universal salvation of mankind;

for that would be a greater display of divine goodness, than for God

only to save a few; and it would be yet more eminently displayed, had he

not only saved all mankind, but fallen angels. Shall the goodness of God

be pretended to be reflected on, because he does not extend it to all

that might have been the objects thereof, had he pleased? Has he not a

right to do what he will with his own? And may not his favour be

communicated in a discriminating way, whereby it will be more advanced

and adored, by those who are the objects thereof, without our taking

occasion from thence to reply against him, or say, what dost thou?

And to this it may be added, that they, who make use of this method of

reasoning, ought to consider that it tends as much to militate against

the doctrine they maintain, namely, that God hath put all mankind into a

salvable state, or that Christ, by his death, procured a possibility of

salvation for all; which, according to their argument, is not so great a

display of the divine goodness, as though God had actually saved all

mankind, which he might have done; for he might have given repentance

and remission of sins to all, as well as sent his Son to die for all;

therefore, upon this head of argument, universal redemption cannot be

defended, without asserting universal salvation. Thus concerning those

absurdities which are pretended to be fastened on the doctrine of

particular redemption; we proceed to consider the last and principal

argument that is generally brought against it, namely,

5. That it is contrary to the express words of scripture; and some speak

with so much assurance, as though there were not one word in scripture,

intimating, that our Lord died only for a few, or only for the

elect;[181] though others will own, that there are some scriptures that

assert particular redemption, but that these are but few; and therefore

the doctrine of universal redemption must be aquiesced in, as being

maintained by a far greater number of scriptures: but, in answer to

this, let it be considered, that it is not the number of scriptures,

brought in defence of either side of the question, that will give any

great advantage to the cause they maintain, unless it could be made

appear that they understood them in the true and genuine sense of the

Holy Ghost therein: but this is not to be passed over, without a farther

enquiry into the sense thereof, which we shall do, and endeavour to

prove that it does not overthrow the doctrine we have been maintaining,

how much soever the mode of expression may seem to oppose it; and, in

order hereunto, we shall first consider in what sense _all_, _all men_,

_the world_, _all the world_, and such-like words are taken in

scripture, as well as in common modes of speaking, in those matters that

do not immediately relate to the subject of universal redemption; and

then we may, without much difficulty, apply the same limitations to the

like manner of speaking, which we find in those scriptures which are

brought for the proof of universal redemption. Here we are to enquire

into the meaning of those words that are used, which seem to denote the

universality of the subject spoken of, when nothing less is intended

thereby, in various instances, which have no immediate reference to the

doctrine of redemption. And,

(1.) As to the word _all_. It is certain, that it is often used when

every individual is not intended thereby: thus we read in Exod. ix. 6.

that _all the cattle of Egypt died_, when the plague of murrain was

inflicted on the beasts; whereas it is said, in the following words,

that _none of the cattle of the children of Israel died_; and, from ver.

3. it appears that none of the _Egyptians’ cattle died_, save those in

_the field_; and it is plain, that there was a great number of cattle

that died not, which were reserved to be cut off by a following plague,

_viz._ that _of hail_, in ver. 19. Moreover, it is said, in ver. 25.

that _the hail smote every herb of the field, and brake every tree of

the field_; yet we read, in chap. x. 5. of the locusts _eating the

residue of that which escaped, and remained unto them from the hail_.

Again, we read, in Exod. xxxii. 3. that _all the people brake off the

golden ear-rings which were in their ears_, of which Aaron made the

calf, which they worshipped; whereas it is not probable that all wore

ear-rings; and it is certain, that all did not join with them, who

committed idolatry herein; for the apostle intimates as much, when he

speaks of _some of them as being idolaters_, who _sat down to eat and

drink, and rose up to play_, 1 Cor. x. 7. And some conclude, that those

of the tribe of Levi, who _gathered themselves unto Moses_, and joined

with him in executing the vengeance of God on the idolaters, are said to

be _on the Lord’s side_; not barely because they repented of their

idolatry, but because they did not join with the rest in it; and, if

this be the sense of the text, yet it does not appear that they were all

exempted from the charge of idolatry, though it be said, that _all the

sons of Levi were gathered to him_; for we read, in ver. 29. of _every

man’s slaying his son, and his brother_; and, in Deut. xxxiii. 9. it is

said, on this occasion, that _they did not know their fathers, nor their

children_, that is, they did not spare them; therefore some of that, as

well as the other tribes, joined in the idolatry, though they were all

gathered to Moses, as being on the Lord’s side.

Again, we read, in Zeph. ii. 14. where the prophet speaks concerning

_God’s destroying Syria_, and _making Nineveh desolate_, that _all the

beasts of the nations shall lodge in the upper lintels of it_; by which

he intends that those beasts, that generally lodge in the wilderness, or

in places remote from cities, such as the _cormorant and bittern_, &c.

should take up their residence in those places, which were formerly

inhabited by the Ninevites; therefore _all the beasts_ cannot be

supposed to signify all that were in all parts of the world.

Again, the prophet Isaiah, in chap. ii. 2. when speaking of the

multitude which should _come to the mountain of the Lord’s house_, which

he expresses by _all nations coming to it_, explains what is meant by

_all nations coming to it_, in the following verse, namely, that _many

people should say, Let us go up to the mountain of the Lord_; and the

prophet Micah, referring to the same thing, says, in chap. iv. 2. that

_many nations shall say, Let us go up to it_, as containing a prediction

of what was to be fulfilled in the gospel-day, in those that, out of

various nations, adhered to the true religion.

Again, it is said, in 1 Chron. xiv. 17. that the _fame of David went

forth into all the lands_, which cannot be meant of those which were far

remote, but those that were round about Judea.

Moreover, it is said, in Matt. iii. 5, 6. that _Jerusalem, and all

Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, went out to John, and were

baptized of him_; which cannot be understood in any other sense, but

that a great number of them went out to him for that purpose. And when

it is said, in Matt. xxi. 26. that _all men held John as a prophet_, it

is not to be supposed that the Scribes and Pharisees, and many others,

who cast contempt on him, held him to be so; but that there were a great

many who esteemed him as such. And when our Saviour says, in Matt. x.

22. _Ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake_, it is certain,

that those that embraced Christianity are to be excluded out of their

number who hated them. Again, when it is said, in Acts ii. 5. that

_there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews of every nation under heaven_,

it is not to be supposed that there were Jews residing in every nation,

who resorted to Jerusalem; upon which occasion, a learned writer[182]

puts this question, Were there any who resorted there from England or

Scotland?

Again, we read, in John iii. 26. that John’s disciples came to him,

complaining, that _Jesus baptized, and all men came unto him_; by which

nothing more is to be understood, but that many, among the Jews attended

on his ministry, which were, by far, the smaller part of that nation. By

these, and many other scriptures, that might be brought to the same

purpose, it appears, that the word _All_ sometimes denotes not every

individual, but a part of mankind.

(2.) Let us now consider the sense in which we are to understand _the

world_, or _all the world_; from whence it will appear, that only a

small part of the world is intended thereby in many scriptures: thus the

Pharisees said, upon the occasion of a number of the Jews following our

Saviour, in John xi. 19. _The world is gone after him_. How small a part

of the world was the Jewish nation? and how small a part of the Jewish

nation attended on our Saviour’s ministry? yet this is called _the

world_.

Again, it is said, in Luke ii. 1. _There went out a decree from

Augustus, that all the world should be taxed_; by which nothing more is

intended than those countries that were subject to the Roman empire;

and, in Acts xvii. 26. it is said, that _these that have turned the

world upside down, are come hither also_; which cannot be meant in any

other sense, but those parts of the world where the apostles had

exercised their ministry. And when the apostle tells the church, in Rom.

i. 8. that _their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world_, he

only means those other churches that were planted in several parts of

the world. And, in Acts xi. 28. it is said, that _Agabus signified, by

the Spirit, that there should be a great dearth, throughout all the

world_; by which nothing is meant but all adjacent countries, which is

to be taken in the same sense, as when it is said, in Gen. xli. 51. that

_all countries came into Egypt to buy corn, because the famine was so

sore in all lands_, that is, in the parts adjacent to Egypt: thus we

have sufficient ground to conclude, that _all men_, _the world_, and

_all the world_, is often taken for a small part of mankind.

But, that we may be a little more particular in considering the various

limitations these words are subject to in scripture, as well as in our

common modes of speaking, let it be observed,

_1st_, That sometimes nothing is intended by all _men_, but all sorts of

men, without distinction of sex, nation, estate, quality, and condition,

of men in the world: thus the apostle says, in 1 Cor. ix. 19. _I made

myself servant to all, that I might gain the more_; this he explains in

the following verses, as including men of all ranks and characters: _To

the Jews, I became a Jew; to them that were under the law, as under the

law; to them that were without the law, as without law; to the weak, I

became weak: I became all things to all men, that by any means I might

gain some_.

_2dly_, Sometimes the word All, or _the world_, is taken for the

Gentiles, in opposition to the Jews; thus the apostle saith, in Rom. xi.

12. _Now if the fall of them_, viz. the Jews, _be the riches of the

world_, that is, of the Gentiles, as he explains it in the following

words; _And the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much

more their fulness?_ and in ver. 32. he saith, _God hath concluded all

in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all_.[183]

_3dly_, _The world_ is sometimes taken for those who do not believe, in

opposition to the _church_: thus it is said, in Rev. xiii. 3, 4. _All

the world wondered after the beast and they worshipped the dragon_;

which is farther explained, in ver. 8. where it is said, that _all that

dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in

the book of life_; and in 1 John v. 19. it is said, _We know that we are

of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness_, or, as some render

it,[184] _in the wicked one_, as being subject to Satan; but the church

is exempted from that charge, notwithstanding the universality of this

expression.

_4thly_, Sometimes the word All is limited by the nature of the thing

spoken of, which is very easy to be understood, though not expressed:

thus the apostle in Tit. ii. 9. exhorts _servants to be obedient unto

their own masters, and to please them well in all things_; which must be

certainly understood as intending all things just, and not contrary to

the laws of God, or the civil laws of the land, in which they live.

_5thly_, The word All is often used, not only in scripture, but in our

common modes of speaking, to signify only those, who are the objects of

that thing, which is done for them, and then the emphasis is laid on the

action, or the person that performs it; as when we say, all malefactors

under a sentence of death, are to be pardoned by the king; we mean

nothing else by it, but that all, who are pardoned, do receive their

pardon from him; or when we say, that virtue renders all men happy, and

vice miserable; we mean, that all who are virtuous are happy, and all

who are vicious miserable; not that virtue, abstracted from the exercise

thereof, makes any happy, or vice miserable; in which case, the word all

is not taken for every individual person, but only for those who are

either good or bad: and this is agreeable to the scripture-mode of

speaking; as when it is said, in Prov. xxiii. 21. _Drowsiness shall

clothe a man_, or every man, _with rags_; or sloth reduces all to

poverty; not all mankind, but all who are addicted to this vice.

Moreover, it is said, in Psal. cxlv. 14. _The Lord upholdeth all that

fall, and raiseth up all those that be bowed down_; which is not to be

understood, as though God keeps all mankind from falling, or raises

every individual person, that is bowed down, so as not to suffer him to

sink under his burden; but that all who are upheld, or raised up, when

bowed down, are made partakers of this privilege by the Lord alone.

Having shewn in what sense the word _All_, or _all the world_, is

frequently used in scripture, when not applied to the doctrine of

redemption; we shall now consider the application thereof unto it,

whereby it may appear, that those scriptures, which are generally

brought in defence of the doctrine of universal redemption, do not tend

to support it, or overthrow the contrary doctrine that we are

maintaining.

1. The first scripture, that is often referred to for that purpose, is 1

John ii. 2. in which it is said, concerning our Saviour, that _he is the

propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins

of the whole world_. For the understanding of which, we must consider,

that it is more than probable that the apostle writes this epistle to

the converted Jews, scattered through various countries in Asia, as

Peter is said to do, 1 Pet. i. 1. and James, James i. 1. for which

reason they are called general epistles; as likewise this of John is,

inasmuch as they are not addressed to particular churches among the

Gentiles, converted to the faith, as most of the apostle Paul’s are.

Now, it is plain, that, in the scripture but now mentioned, when these

believing Jews are given to understand, that Christ is _a propitiation

for their sins, and not for their’s only, but for the sins of the whole

world_; the meaning is, not for their sins only, who were Jews, but for

the sins of the believing Gentiles, or those who were converted by the

ministry of the apostle Paul, who is called _the apostle of the

Gentiles_. This has been before considered to be the meaning of the word

_world_ in many scriptures; and so the sense is, that the saving effects

of Christ’s death redound to all who believe, throughout the world,

whether Jews or Gentiles.

2. Another scripture generally brought to prove universal redemption,

is, that in Heb. ii. 9. _That he_, to wit, Christ, _by the grace of God,

should taste death for every man_. For the understanding of which, we

must have recourse to the words immediately following, which are plainly

an illustration thereof; accordingly they, for whom Christ tasted death,

are styled _many sons_, who are to be _brought to glory_; and, in order

thereunto, _Christ, the Captain of their salvation, was made perfect

through sufferings_, which is an explication of his being _crowned with

glory and honour, for the suffering of death_; and it plainly proves,

that it was for these only that he tasted death, and that by _every

man_, for whom he tasted it, is meant every one of his sons, or of those

who are described, in ver. 11. as _sanctified_, and _whom he is not

ashamed to call brethren_; and they are further styled, in ver. 13. _The

children whom God hath given him_; so that this sense of the words being

so agreeable to the context, which asserts the doctrine of particular

redemption, it cannot reasonably be supposed that they are to be taken

in a sense which has a tendency to overthrow it, or prove that Christ

died equally and alike for all men.

3. Another scripture, brought for the same purpose, is 1 Cor. xv. 22.

_As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive_. But let

it be considered, that the apostle is not speaking directly concerning

redemption in this text, but concerning the resurrection of the dead;

and, if it be understood of a glorious resurrection unto eternal life,

no one can suppose that every individual of mankind shall be made

partaker of this blessing, which is also obvious, from what is said in

the verse immediately following, where they who are said to be made

alive in Christ, are described as such, whom he has a special propriety

in, _Christ the first fruits, afterward they that are Christ’s at his

coming_; and therefore the meaning is only this, that all of them, who

shall be raised up in glory, shall obtain this privilege by Christ,

whose resurrection was the first-fruits thereof.

I am sensible that the reason of the application of this scripture to

prove universal redemption, is principally taken from the opposition

that there seems to be between the death of all mankind in Adam, and the

life which is obtained by Christ; and therefore they suppose, that the

happiness, which we enjoy by him, is of equal extent with the misery we

sustained by the fall of Adam: but, if this were the sense of the text,

it must prove an universal salvation, and not barely the possibility

thereof; since the apostle is speaking of a privilege that should be

conferred in the end of time, and not of that which we enjoy under the

gospel-dispensation; accordingly it does not, in the least, answer the

end for which it is brought.

4. The next scripture, by which it is supposed that universal redemption

may be defended, is that in Rom. v. 18. _As by the offence of one,

judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness

of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life_. For

the understanding of which scripture, let it be considered, that the

blessing, which is said to extend to all, is no less than justification

of life, and not merely a possibility of attaining salvation; and, in

the foregoing verse, they, who are interested in this privilege, are

said to _receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness_,

and _to reign in life by Jesus Christ_. Now certainly this privilege is

too great to be applied to the whole world; and, indeed, that which the

apostle, in this verse, considers, as being _upon all men unto

justification of life_, he explains, when he says, _Many shall be made

righteous_; therefore _this free gift, which came upon all men unto

justification_, intends nothing else, but that a select number, who are

said to be many, or the whole multitude of those who do, or shall

believe, shall be made righteous.

_Object._ If it be objected to this sense of the text, that there is an

opposition between that judgment which came by the offence of one, to

wit, Adam, upon all men, unto condemnation, and that righteousness,

which came upon all men, unto justification; and therefore all men must

be taken in the same sense in both parts of the verse, and consequently

must be extended to all the world.

_Answ._ To this it may be replied, that it is not necessary, nor

reasonable, to suppose, that these terms of opposition have any respect

to the universal extent of condemnation and justification; for the

apostle’s design is not to compare the number of those who shall be

justified, with that of those who were condemned by the fall of Adam;

but to compare the two heads together, Adam and Christ, and to shew,

that as we are liable to condemnation by the one, so we obtain the gift

of righteousness by the other; which is plainly the apostle’s method of

reasoning, agreeable to the whole scope of the chapter, as may easily be

observed, by those who compare these words with several foregoing

verses.

5. There is another scripture brought to prove universal redemption, in

2 Cor. v. 14, 15. _The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus

judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead_; by which it is

supposed, that the apostle is here proving that all mankind are dead in

sin, and that the medium by which he proves it, is Christ’s dying for

all men; so that the remedy is as extensive as the disease, and

therefore that this is an undeniable proof of universal redemption.

But this is not a true representation of the apostle’s method of

reasoning; for he designs not to prove that all were dead in sin, but to

it. That this may appear, let us consider the connexion of this text

with what goes before. The apostle speaks of them, in the foregoing

verses, as having assurance of their future salvation, and as _groaning

to be clothed upon with their house, which is from heaven_; and as

having the _first fruits of the Spirit_, and says that the apostles were

made manifest in their consciences, that is, they had something in their

own consciences that evinced the success of their ministry to them, upon

which account they had occasion to glory on their behalf; all which

expressions denote them to have been in a converted state. And the

apostle adds, in ver. 13. _Whether we be beside ourselves, or whether we

be sober_, that is, whether we have a greater or less degree of fervency

in preaching the gospel, it is for God, that is for his glory, and for

your sakes; for the love of Christ, that is, either his love to us, or

our love to him, constraineth us hereunto; because we thus judge, that

if one, namely, Christ, died for all, that is, for you all, then were

all dead, or you all are dead, that is, not dead in sin, but you are

made partakers of that communion which believers have with Christ in his

death, whereby they are said to be dead unto sin, and unto the world;

and the result hereof is, that they are obliged to live not to

themselves but to Christ. This seems more agreeable to the design of the

apostle, than to suppose that he intends only to prove the fall of man,

from his being recovered by Christ, since there is no appearance of any

argument to the like purpose, in any other part of the apostle’s

writings; whereas our being dead to sin, as the consequence of Christ’s

death, is what he often mentions, and, indeed, it seems to be one of his

peculiar phrases: thus he speaks of believers, as _being dead to sin_,

Rom. vi. 2. and _dead with Christ_, ver. 8. and elsewhere he says, _You

are dead_, Col. iii. 3. that is, you have communion with Christ, in his

death, or are dead unto sin; and the apostle speaks of _their being dead

with Christ from the rudiments of the world_, chap. ii. 20. that is, if

you have communion with Christ, in his death, you are obliged not to

observe the ceremonial law, which is called the rudiments of the world;

and, in several other places, he speaks of believers being crucified,

dead, buried, and risen, from the dead, as having communion with Christ

therein, or being made partakers of those benefits which he procured

thereby. If, therefore, this be the apostle’s frequent method of

speaking, why may not we suppose, that in this verse, under our present

consideration, he argues, that because _Christ died for them all_,

therefore _they were_, or _they are all dead_;[185] And, being thus

dead, they are obliged, as he observes in the following verse, _not to

live to themselves, but to Christ that died for them_, and thereby

procured this privilege, which they are made partakers of. If this sense

of the text be but allowed to be equally probable with the other, it

will so far weaken the force thereof, as that it will not appear, from

this scripture, that Christ died for all men.

6. Universal redemption is attempted to be proved, from John iii. 16.

_God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that

whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting

life_: But, if we understand _the world_, as taken for the Gentiles, as

it is oftentimes in scripture, then the sense of the text seems to be

this, which is not inconsistent with special redemption, namely, that

the love of God, which was expressed in sending his Son to die for those

whom he designed hereby to redeem, is of a much larger extent, as to the

objects thereof, than it was in former ages; for it includes in it not

only those who believe among the Jews, but whosoever believes in him,

throughout the world; not that their believing in him is the foundation,

or cause, but the effect of his love, and is to be considered as the

character of the persons, who are the objects thereof. In this sense, we

are also to understand another scripture, in John i. 29. _Behold the

Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world_, that is, of all

those whose sins are expiated hereby, throughout the whole world.

7. The doctrine of universal redemption is farther maintained, from our

Saviour’s words, in John vi. 33. _The bread of God is he that cometh

down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world_; which is explained in

ver. 51. _I am the living bread, which came down from heaven; if any man

eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will

give, is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world_: But it

does not appear, that Christ hereby intends that his death was a price

of redemption paid for all mankind; for he speaks of the application of

redemption, which is expressed by his giving life, and not barely of his

procuring a possibility of its being attained; and they, to whom he

gives this privilege, are described as applying it to themselves, by

faith, which is doubtless, the meaning of that metaphorical expression,

whereby persons are said to _eat of this bread_, or _his flesh_; so that

the meaning of this scripture is, that the death of Christ is appointed,

as the great means whereby all men, throughout the whole world, who

apply it by faith, should attain eternal life: But this cannot be said

of all, without exemption; and therefore it does not from hence appear,

that Christ’s death was designed to procure life for the world.

8. There is another scripture, brought to the same purpose, in Matt.

xviii. 11. _The Son of man is come to save that which is lost_, that is,

as they suppose, all that were lost; and consequently, since the whole

world was brought into a lost state by the fall, Christ came to save

them. The whole stress of this argument is laid on the sense that they

give of the Greek word[186], which we render, _that which was lost_,

whereby they understand every one that was lost; whereas it only

denotes, that salvation supposes them, that have an interest in it, to

have been in a lost state. And, indeed, the text does not seem

immediately to respect the purchase of redemption, or salvation, by

Christ’s shedding his blood, as a Priest, but the application thereof,

in effectually calling, and thereby saving lost sinners. This is

illustrated by the parable of _the lost sheep_, (in the following

words,) which the shepherd brings back to the fold, upon which occasion

he says, that _it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven,

that one of these little ones should perish_. And this farther appears,

from our Saviour’s using the same mode of speaking, with this addition,

that _he came to seek_, as well as to _save_, Luke xix. 9, 10. them,

upon the occasion of his converting Zaccheus, and telling him, that

_salvation was come to his house_. And this agrees well with that

prediction relating to Christ’s executing his Prophetical office, in the

salvation of his people, as being their Shepherd; in which he is

represented, as saying, _I will seek that which was lost, and bring

again that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was

broken, and will strengthen that which was sick_, Ezek. xxxiv. 16.

Moreover, the parable of the _lost sheep_, which Christ recovered,

appears by its connexion with the foregoing verses, to have a particular

respect to those _little_, or humble _ones_, that believe in him, who

went astray, by reason of some offences that were cast in their way; and

therefore, when he had denounced a threatening against those who should

offend any of them, and cautioned the world that they should not do

this, by despising them, Matt, xviii. 6, 10. he supposes this treatment

would cause some of them to go astray; upon which he says, that one of

his ends of coming into the world, was to seek, to save, and to recover

them.

9. Universal redemption is farther argued, from the universality of

divine grace; and accordingly that text is often referred to, in Tit.

ii. 11. _The grace of God that bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all

men_: But this seems very remote from the sense of the Holy Ghost, in

these words; for by _the grace of God_ is meant the gospel, that brings

the glad tidings of salvation; and its _appearing to all men_, signifies

being preached to the Gentiles: or suppose, by _the grace of God_, we

understand the display of his grace in the work of redemption, it is not

said, that it was designed for, or applied to all men, but only that the

publication thereof is more general than it had formerly been. And when

the apostle, in ver. 14. speaks more particularly concerning redemption,

he alters his mode of expression, and considers it, with its just

limitation, with respect to the objects thereof, _viz._ that _he gave

himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify

unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works_. We shall add but

one scripture more, which is brought in defence of universal redemption,

_viz._

10. That in which the apostle speaks of God, in 1 Tim. iv. 10. as _the

Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe_; wherein universal

redemption is not asserted in the same sense in which they maintain it,

_viz._ that God hath brought all men into a salvable state, so that they

may be saved if they will: But the meaning of this scripture is, that

_God is the Saviour of all men_, that is, his common bounty extends

itself to all, as the Psalmist observes, _The Lord is good to all, and

his tender mercies are over all his works_, Psal. cxlv. 9. but he is

_more especially the Saviour of them that believe_, inasmuch as they are

interested in the special benefits purchased by his redemption, who are

said to be _saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation_, Isa. xlv.

17.

There are several other scriptures brought to prove universal

redemption, as when it is said, that _God will have all men to be saved,

and come to the knowledge of the truth_, 1 Tim. ii. 4. and, _The Lord is

not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to

repentance_, 2 Pet. iii. 9. which have been before considered[187]; and

therefore we pass them over at present, and some other scriptures, from

whence it is argued, that Christ died for all, because he died for some

that shall perish, as when the apostle speaks of some _false teachers,

who deny the Lord that bought them_, 2 Pet. ii. 1. and another, _Destroy

not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died_, Rom. xiv. 15. and that in

which the apostle speaks of a person _who counted the blood of the

covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing_, Heb. x. 29. and

some other scriptures to the like purpose, the consideration whereof I

shall refer to a following answer[188], in which the doctrine of the

saints’ perseverance is defended.[189]

Thus concerning the first branch of Christ’s Priestly office, consisting

in his offering himself a sacrifice, without spot, to God, and the

persons for whom this was done. We should now proceed to consider the

second branch thereof, consisting in his making continual intercession

for them, for whom he offered up himself: But, this being particularly

insisted on in a following answer[190], we shall pass it over at

present, and proceed to consider the execution of his Kingly office.

Footnote 143:

_Vid. Ephiph. Hær. Page 67. § 7._

Footnote 144:

_Among the latter, is the learned Dr. Lightfoot. See his Works, Vol.

I. Page 12. and Vol. II. Page 327._

Footnote 145:

_We have no account of the year when this battle was fought; but it is

evident that it was before Isaac was born, and consequently before

Abraham had lived 25 years in the land of Canaan. And that Shem was

then living, appears from hence, that from the flood to Abraham’s

coming into the land of Canaan, was 427 years, as appears by

considering the sum total of the years of the lives of the patriarchs,

mentioned in_ Gen. xi. 10. _& seq. and also that Terah was 130 years

old when Abraham was born, as appears, by comparing_ Gen. xi. 32.

_with_ Acts vii. 4. _and_ Gen. xii. 4. _and by considering Abraham as

75 years old, as it is there said he was, when he left Haran. Now Shem

was born 98 or 100 years before the flood, as appears by comparing_

Gen. v. 32. _with_ chap. xi. 10. _and_ vii. 11. _Therefore, when

Abraham went out of his country into the land of Canaan, Shem was 525

or 527 years old; and, when Shem died, he was 600 years old_, Gen. xi.

10, 11. _therefore Shem lived more than half a hundred years after

this battle was fought_.

Footnote 146:

_See Jurieu’s critical history_, vol. I. chap. 11.

Footnote 147:

As yet there was no church.

Footnote 148:

_See critical history_, vol. I. page 110.

Footnote 149:

_This opinion is maintained by Cunæus, [Vid. ejusd. Repub. Hebr. Lib.

III. cap. 3.] and some others after him._

Footnote 150:

“Some insist that he is none other than the _Son of God_ himself, who,

assuming the _appearance_, or _reality_, of humanity, exhibited to

Abraham an early picture of his future priesthood.

“This is all over contemptible.—1. Because every high priest is taken

from among men; the _appearance_ of humanity is not enough.—2. Because

if he was at that time a priest, and discharged the duties of his

office, he must have ‘suffered often,’ (twice) ‘from the beginning of

the world;’ and not ‘by the once offering up of himself have for ever

perfected them who are sanctified:’ then, moreover, Abraham would have

received the promised blessing, contrary to the scriptures: and, in

fine, the appearance of the Son of God, as the Son of Mary, was

superfluous. If, to avoid those absurdities, it be alleged that though

he appeared as a priest, he did not discharge the duties of his

office: then, in the first place, he is degraded into a mere pageant,

an officer without functions: and, in the second place, he is stripped

of all typical character: for the priest who neither _sacrifices_, nor

_intercedes_, can never be a type of one who does _both_.—3. Because,

if Melchisedec was the Son of God, whether in real humanity, or only

in its appearance, _he_ must have been a type of _himself_; the ideas

of _identity_ and _similarity_ are confounded; and Paul instead of

saying, αφωμοιωμενος τω υιω του Θεου, that he was ‘made like to the

Son of God,’ should have said, ων ο υιος του Θεου, that he was the Son

of God.—4. Because it would be unworthy the manly sense of Paul, to

say nothing of _inspiration_, to labour through a long dissertation to

prove a mere truism, which it would disgrace an ideot to utter, and

insult a child to offer for information; namely, that Messiah’s

priesthood was very like itself.—5. Because it would be extremely

irreverent to suppose, that the adorable God lifted up his hand and

swore, that his Son’s priesthood, should be like his Son’s priesthood.

An identical proposition does not require such a solemn confirmation.”