A Display of Arminianism
By John Owen
Chapter 9
OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, AND OF THE EFFICACY OF HIS
MERITS.
The sum of those controversies, wherewith the Arminians and
their abettors have troubled the church, about the death of Christ, may be
reduced to two heads:—First, Concerning the object of his merit, or whom he
died for; secondly, Concerning the efficacy and end of his death, or what he
deserved, procured, merited, and obtained, for them for whom he died. In
resolution of the first, they affirm that he died for all and every one; of the
second, that he died for no one man at all in that sense Christians have
hitherto believed that he laid down his life, and submitted himself to bear the
burden of his Father’s wrath for their sakes. It seems to me a strange
extenuation of the merit of Christ, to teach that no good at all by his death
doth redound to divers of them for whom he died. What participation in the
benefit of his suffering had Pharaoh or Judas? Do they not at this hour, and
shall they not to eternity, feel the weight and burden of their own sins? Had
they either grace in this world, or glory in the other, that they should be
said to have an interest in the death of our Savior? Christians have hitherto
believed, that for whom Christ died, for their sins he made satisfaction, that
they themselves should not eternally suffer for them. Is God unjust to punish
twice for the same fault? his own Son once, and again the poor sinners for whom
he suffered? I cannot conceive an intention in God that Christ should satisfy
his justice for the sin of them that were in hell some thousands of years
before, and yet be still resolved to continue their punishment on them to all eternity.
No, doubtless: Christ giveth life to every one for whom he gave his life; he
loseth not one of them whom he purchased with his blood.
The first part of this
controversy may be handled under these two questions:—First, Whether God giving
his Son, and Christ making his soul a ransom for sin, intended thereby to
redeem all and every one from their sins, that all and every one alike, from
the beginning of the world to the last day, should all equally be partakers of
the fruits of his death and passion; which purpose of theirs is in the most
frustrate? Secondly, Whether God had not a certain infallible intention of
gathering unto himself a “chosen people,” of collecting a “church of
first-born,” of saving his “little flock,” of bringing some certainly to happiness,
by the death of his only Son; which in the event he doth accomplish?
The second part also may be
reduced to these two heads:—First, Whether Christ did not make full
satisfaction for all their sins for whom he died, and merited glory, or
everlasting happiness, to be bestowed on them upon the performance of those
conditions God should require? Secondly (which is the proper controversy I
shall chiefly insist upon), Whether Christ did not procure for his own people a
power to become the sons of God, merit and deserve at the hands of God for
them, grace, faith, righteousness, and sanctification, whereby they may be
enabled infallibly to perform the conditions of the new covenant, upon the
which they shall be admitted to glory?
To the first question of the
first part of the controversy, the Arminians answer affirmatively,—to wit, that
Christ died for all alike; the benefit of his passion belongs equally to all
the posterity of Adam. And to the second negatively,—that God had no such
intention of bringing many chosen sons unto salvation by the death of Christ,
but determined of grace and glory no more precisely to one than to another, to
John than Judas, Abraham than Pharaoh? Both which, as the learned Moulin
observed,[i][i] [1] seemed to be invented to make
Christianity ridiculous, and expose our religion to the derision of all knowing
men: for who can possibly conceive that one by the appointment of God should
die for another, and yet that other, by the same justice, be allotted unto
death himself, when one’s death only was due; that Christ hath made a full
satisfaction for their sins who shall everlastingly feel the weight of them
themselves; that he should merit and obtain reconciliation with God for them
who live and die his enemies, grace and glory for them who are graceless in
this life and damned in that which is to come; that he should get remission of
sins for them whose sins were never pardoned? In brief, if this sentence be
true, either Christ by his death did not reconcile us unto God, make satisfaction
to his justice for our iniquities, redeem us from our sins, purchase a kingdom,
an everlasting inheritance for us,—which I hope no Christian will say; or else
all the former absurdities must necessarily follow,—which no rational man will
ever admit.
Neither may we be charged as
straiteners of the merit of Christ; for we advance the true value and worth
thereof (as hereafter will appear) far beyond all the Arminians ascribe unto
it. We confess that that “blood of God,” Acts 20:28, of the “Lamb without blemish
and without spot,” 1 Peter 1:19, was so exceedingly precious, of that infinite
worth and value, that it might have saved a thousand believing worlds, John
3:16; Romans 3:22. His death was of sufficient dignity to have been made a
ransom for all the sins of every one in the world. And on this internal
sufficiency of his death and passion is grounded the universality of
evangelical promises; which have no such restriction in their own nature as
that they should not be made to all and every one, though the promulgation and
knowledge of them are tied only to the good pleasure of God’s special
providence, Matthew 16:17; as also that economy and dispensation of the new
covenant whereby, the partition-wall being broken down, there remains no more
difference between Jew and Gentile, the utmost borders of the earth being given
in for Christ’s inheritance. So that, in some sense, Christ may be said to die
for “all,” and “the whole world;”—first, Inasmuch as the worth and value of his
death was very sufficient to have been made a price for all their sins;
secondly, Inasmuch as this word “all” is taken for some of all sorts (not for
every one of every sort), as it is frequently used in the holy Scripture: so
Christ being lifted up, “drew all unto him,” John 12:32; that is, believers out
of all sorts of men. The apostles cured all diseases, or some of all sorts:
they did not cure every particular disease, but there was no kind of disease
that was exempted from their power of healing. So that where it is said that Christ
“died for all,” it is meant either,—first, All the faithful; or, secondly, Some
of all sorts; thirdly, Not only Jews, but Gentiles. For,—
Secondly, The proper counsel and
intention of God in sending his Son into the world to die was, that thereby he
might confirm and ratify the new covenant to his elect, and purchase for them
all the good things which are contained in the tenure of that covenant,—to wit,
grace and glory; that by his death he might bring many (yet some certain)
children to glory, obtaining for them that were given unto him by his Father
(that is, his whole church) reconciliation with God, remission of sins, faith,
righteousness, sanctification, and life eternal. That is the end to which they
are to be brought, and the means whereby God will have them attain it. He died
that he might gather the dispersed children of God, and make them partakers of
everlasting glory,—to “give eternal life to as many as God gave him,” John
17:2. And on this purpose of himself and his Father is founded the intercession
of Christ for his elect and chosen people; performed partly on the earth, John
17, partly in heaven, before the throne of grace: which is nothing but a
presentation of himself and his merits, accompanied with the prayers of his
mediatorship before God, that he would be pleased to grant and effectually to
apply the good things he hath by them obtained to all for whom he hath obtained
them. His intercession in heaven is nothing but a continued oblation of
himself. So that whatsoever Christ impetrated, merited, or obtained by his
death and passion, must be infallibly applied unto and bestowed upon them for
whom he intended to obtain it; or else his intercession is vain, he is not
heard in the prayers of his mediatorship. An actual reconciliation with God,
and communication of grace and glory, must needs betide all them that have any
such interest in the righteousness of Christ as to have it accepted for their
good. The sole end why Christ would so dearly purchase those good things is, an
actual application of them unto his chosen: God set forth the propitiation of
his blood for the remission of sins, that he might be the justifier of him
which believeth on Jesus, Romans 3:25,26. But this part of the controversy is
not that which I principally intend; only, I will give you a brief sum of those
reasons which overthrow their heresy in this particular branch thereof:—
First, The death of Christ is in
divers places of the Scripture restrained to his “people,” and “elect,” his
“church,” and “sheep,” Matthew 1:21; John 10:11-13; Acts 20:28; Ephesians 5:25;
John 11:51,52; Romans 8:32,34; Hebrews 2:9,14; Revelation 5:9; Daniel 9:26;—and
therefore the good purchased thereby ought not to be extended to “dogs,”
“reprobates,” and “those that are without.”
Secondly, For whom Christ died,
he died as their sponsor, in their room and turn, that he might free them from
the guilt and desert of death; which is clearly expressed Romans 5:6-8. “He was
wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement
of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed,” Isaiah 53:5,6,
etc. “He hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for
us,” Galatians 3:13. “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin,” 2
Corinthians 5:21. Evidently he changeth turns with us, “that we might be made
the righteousness of God in him.” Yea, in other things, it is plain in the
Scripture that to die for another is to take his place and room, with an
intention that he should live, 2 Samuel 18:33; Romans 5. So that Christ dying
for men made satisfaction for their sins, that they should not die. Now, for
what sins he made satisfaction, for them the justice of God is satisfied; which
surely is not done for the sins of the reprobates, because he justly punisheth
them to eternity upon themselves, Matthew 5:26.
Thirdly, For whom Christ “died,”
for them also he “rose again,” to make intercession for them: for whose
“offenses he was delivered,” for their “justification he was raised,” Romans
4:25, 5:10. He is a high priest “to make intercession for them” in the holy of
holies for whom “by his own blood he obtained eternal redemption,” Hebrews
9:11,12. These two acts of his priesthood are not to be separated; it belongs
to the same mediator for sin to sacrifice and pray. Our assurance that he is
our advocate is grounded on his being a propitiation for our sins. He is an
“advocate” for every one for whose sins his blood was a “propitiation,” 1 John
2:1,2. But Christ doth not intercede and pray for all, as himself often
witnesseth, John 17; he “maketh intercession” only for them who “come unto God
by him,” Hebrews 7:25. He is not a mediator of them that perish, no more than
an advocate of them that fail in their suits; and therefore the benefit of his
death also must be restrained to them who are finally partakers of both. We
must not so disjoin the offices of Christ’s mediatorship, that one of them may
be versated about some towards whom he exerciseth not the other; much less
ought we so to separate the several acts of the same office. For whom Christ is
a priest, to offer himself a sacrifice for their sins, he is surely a king, to
apply the good things purchased by his death unto them, as Arminius himself
confesseth; much more to whom he is a priest by sacrifice, he will be a priest
by intercession. And, therefore, seeing he doth not intercede and pray for
every one, he did not die for every one.
Fourthly, For whom Christ died
he merited grace and glory, faith and salvation, and reconciliation with God;
as I shall show hereafter. But this he hath not done for all and every one.
Many do never believe; the wrath of God remaineth upon some; the wrath of God
abideth on them that do not believe, John in. 36. To abide argueth a continued,
uninterrupted act. Now, to be reconciled to one, and yet to lie under his heavy
anger, seem to me ajsu>stata,—things
that will scarce consist together. The reasons are many; I only point at the
heads of some of them.
Fifthly, Christ died for them
whom God gave unto him to be saved: “Thine they were, and thou gavest them me,”
John 17:6. He layeth down his life for the sheep committed to his charge,
chapter 10:11. But all are not the sheep of Christ, all are not given unto him
of God to be brought to glory; for of those that are so given there is not one
that perisheth, for “he giveth eternal life to as many as God hath given him,”
chapter 17:2. “No man is able to pluck them out of his Father’s hand,” chapter
10:28,29.
Sixthly, Look whom, and how
many, that love of God embraced that was the cause of sending his Son to redeem
them; for them, and so many, did Christ, according to the counsel of his
Father, and in himself, intentionally lay down his life. Now, this love is not
universal, being his “good pleasure” of blessing with spiritual blessings and
saving some in Christ, Ephesians 1:4,5; which good pleasure of his evidently
comprehendeth some, when others are excluded, Matthew 11:25,26. Yea, the love
of God in giving Christ for us is of the same extent with that grace whereby he
calleth us to faith, or bestoweth faith on us: for “he hath called us with an
holy calling, according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in
Christ Jesus,” 2 Timothy 1:9; which, doubtless, is not universal and common
unto all.
Innumerable other reasons there
are to prove, that seeing God hath given his elect only, whom only he loved, to
Christ to be redeemed; and seeing that the Son loveth only those who are given
him of his Father, and redeemeth only whom he loveth; seeing, also, that the
Holy Spirit, the love of the Father and the Son, sanctifieth all, and only
them, that are elected and redeemed,—it is not our part, with a preposterous
liberality, against the witness of Christ himself, to assign the salvation
attained by him as due to them that are without the congregation of them whom
the Father hath loved and chosen, without that church which the Son loved and
gave his life for, nor none of the members of that sanctified body whereof
Christ is the Head and Savior. I urge no more, because this is not that part of
the controversy that I desire to lay open.
I come now to consider the main
question of this difference, though sparingly handled by our divines,
concerning what our Savior merited and purchased for them for whom he died. And
here you shall find the old idol playing his pranks, and quite divesting the
merit of Christ from the least ability or power of doing us any good; for
though the Arminians pretend, very speciously, that Christ died for all men,
yet, in effect, they make him die for no one man at all, and that by denying
the effectual operation of his death, and ascribing the proper issues of his
passion to the brave endeavors of their own Pelagian deity.
We, according to the Scriptures,
plainly believe that Christ hath, by his righteousness, merited for us grace
and glory; that we are blessed with all spiritual blessings, in, through, and
for him; that he is made unto us righteousness, and sanctification, and
redemption; that he hath procured for us, and that God for his sake bestoweth
on us, every grace in this life that maketh us differ from others, and all that
glory we hope for in that which is to come; he procured for us remission of all
our sins, an actual reconciliation with God, faith, and obedience. Yea, but
this is such a desperate doctrine as stabs at the very heart of the idol, and
would make him as altogether useless as if he were but a fig-tree log. What
remaineth for him to do, if all things in this great work of our salvation must
be thus ascribed unto Christ and the merit of his death? Wherefore the
worshippers of this great god, Lib. Arbit., oppose their engines against the
whole fabric, and cry down the title of Christ’s merits to these spiritual
blessings, in the behalf of their imaginary deity.
Now, because they are things of a
twofold denomination about which we contend before the King of heaven, each
part producing their evidence, the first springing from the favor of God
towards us, the second from the working of his grace actually within us, I
shall handle them severally and apart;—especially because to things of this
latter sort, gifts, as we call them, enabling us to fulfill the condition
required for the attaining of glory, we lay a double claim on God’s behalf;
first, As the death of Christ is the meritorious cause procuring them of him;
secondly, As his free grace is their efficient cause working them in us;—they
also producing a double title, whereby they would invest their beloved darling
with a sole propriety in causing these effects; first, In regard that they are our
own acts, performed in us and by us; secondly, As they are parts of our duty
which we are enjoined to do. So that the quarrel is directly between Christ’s
merits and our own free-will about procuring the favor of God, and obtaining
grace and righteousness. Let us see what they say to the first.
They affirm that [ii][ii] [2] “the
immediate and proper effect or end of the death and passion of Christ is, not
an actual ablation of sin from men, not an actual remission of iniquities,
justification and redemption of any soul;” that is, Christ’s death is not the
meritorious cause of the remission of our sins, of redemption and
justification. The meritorious cause, I say: for of some of them, as of
justification, as it is terminated in us, we confess there are causes of other
kinds, as faith is the instrument and the Holy Spirit the efficient thereof;
but for the sole meritorious procuring cause of these spiritual blessings, we
always took it to be the righteousness and death of Christ, believing plainly
that the end why Christ died, and the fruit of his sufferings, was our
reconciliation with God, redemption from our sins, freedom from the curse,
deliverance from the wrath of God and power of hell,—though we be not actual
partakers of these things, to the pacification of our own consciences, without
the intervening operation of the Holy Spirit, and faith by him wrought in us.
But if this be not, pray what is
obtained by the death of Christ Why, [iii][iii] [3] “a
potential, conditionate reconciliation, not actual and absolute,” saith
Corvinus. But yet this potential reconciliation being a new expression, never
intimated in the Scripture, and scarce of itself intelligible, we want a
farther explanation of their mind, to know what it is that directly they assign
to the merits of Christ. Wherefore they tell us that the fruit of his death
was [iv][iv] [4] “such
an impetration or obtaining of reconciliation with God, and redemption for us,
that God thereby hath a power, his justice being satisfied, and so not
compelling him to the contrary, to grant remission of sins to sinful men on
what condition he would;” or, as another speaketh it, [v][v] [5] “There
was, by the effusion of Christ’s blood, a right obtained unto and settled in
God, of reconciling the world, and of opening unto all a gate of repentance and
faith in Christ.” But now, whereas the Scripture everywhere affirmeth that
Christ died for our good, to obtain blessings for us, to purchase our peace, to
acquire and merit for us the good things contained in the promise of the covenant,
this opinion seems to restrain the end and fruit thereof to the obtaining of a
power and liberty unto God of prescribing us a condition whereby we may be
saved. But yet, it may be, thus much at least Christ obtained of God in our
behalf, that he should assign faith in him to be this condition, and to bestow
it upon us also. No; neither the one nor the other. [vi][vi] [6] “After
all this, had it so seemed good unto his wisdom, God might have chosen the
Jews, and others, following the righteousness of the law, as well as believers;
because he might have assigned any other condition of salvation besides faith
in Christ,” saith Grevinchovius. Notwithstanding, then, the death of Christ for
us, we might have been held to the old rule, “Do this, and live.” But if this
be true, I cannot perceive how it may be said that Christ died to redeem us
from our sins, to save our souls, and bring us unto glory. Neither, perhaps, do
they think this to be any great inconvenience; for the same author affirmeth
that [vii][vii] [7] “Christ
cannot be said properly to die to save any one.” And a little after he more
fully declares himself, that [viii][viii] [8] “after
Christ had obtained all that he did obtain by his death, the right remained
wholly in God to apply it, or not to apply it, as it should seem good unto him;
the application of grace and glory to any man was not the end for which Christ
obtained them, but to get a right and power unto God of bestowing those things
on what sort of men he would;”—which argues no redemption of us from our sins,
but a vindication of God from such a condition wherein he had not power to
forgive them; not an obtaining of salvation for us, but of a liberty unto God
of saving us on some condition or other.
But now, after God hath got this
power by the death of Christ, and out of his gracious good pleasure assigned
faith to be the means for us to attain those blessings, he hath procured
himself a liberty to bestow. Did Christ obtain this faith for us of him, if it
be a thing not in our own power? No; [ix][ix] [9] “faith
is not obtained by the death of Christ,” saith Corvinus. So that there is no
good thing, no spiritual blessing, into which any man in the world hath any
interest by the death of Christ: which is not so great an absurdity but that
they are most ready to grant it. Arnoldus confesseth, [x][x] [10] “that
he believes that the death of Christ might have enjoyed its end, or his merit
its full force, although never any had believed:” and again, [xi][xi] [11] “The
death and satisfaction of Christ being accomplished, it might come to pass
that, none fulfilling the condition of the new covenant, none should be saved.”
So also saith Grevinchovius. O Christ! that any pretending to profess thy holy
name should thus slight the precious work of thy death and passion! Surely
never any before, who counted it their glory to be called Christians, did ever
thus extenuate (their friends the Socinians only excepted) the dignity of his
merit and satisfaction. Take but a short view of what benefit they allow to
redound to us by the effusion of his precious blood, and you may see what a
pestilent heresy these men have labored to bring into the church. Neither faith
nor salvation, grace nor glory, hath he purchased for us,—not any spiritual
blessing, that by our interest in his death we can claim to be ours! It is not
such a reconciliation with God as that he thereupon should be contented again
to be called our God; it is not justification, nor righteousness, nor actual
redemption from our sins; it did not make satisfaction for our iniquities, and
deliver us from the curse; [xii][xii] [12] “only
it was a means of obtaining such a possibility of salvation, as that God,
without wronging of his justice, might save us if he would, one way or other.”
So that, when Christ had done all that he could, there was not one man in the
world immediately the better for it; notwithstanding the utmost of his
endeavor, every one might have been damned with Judas to the pit of hell;
for [xiii][xiii] [13] “he
died as well for Simon Magus and Judas as he did for Peter and Paul,” say the
Arminians. Now, if no more good redound to us by the death of Christ than to
Simon Magus, we are not much obliged to him for our salvation. Nay, he may be
rather said to have redeemed God than us; for he procured for him immediately a
power to redeem us if he would; for us only, by virtue of that power, a
possibility to be redeemed;—which leaves nothing of the nature of merit annexed
to his death, for that deserveth that something be done, not only that it may
be done; the workman deserveth that his wages be given him, and not that it may
be given him. And then what becomes of all the comfort and consolation that is
proposed to us in the death of Christ? But it is time to see how this stubble
is burned and consumed by the word of God, and that established which they
thought to overthrow.
First, It is, clear that Christ
died to procure for us an actual reconciliation with God, and not only a power
for us to be reconciled unto him; for “when we were enemies, we were reconciled
to God by the death of his Son,” Romans 5:10. We enjoy an actual reconciliation
unto God by his death. He is content to be called “our God” when we are
enemies, without the intervening of any condition on our part required; though
the sweetness, comfort, and knowledge of this reconciliation do not compass our
souls before we believe in him. Again, we have remission of sins by his blood,
and justification from them; not a sole vindication into such an estate
wherein, if it please God and ourselves, our sins are pardonable: for we are
“justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to
declare his righteousness for the remission of sins,” Romans 3:24,25. Yea, he
obtained for us by his death righteousness and holiness. “He gave himself for
the church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it,” Ephesians 5:25,26; “that he
might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle;”
that we should be “holy and without blemish,” verse 27. Where, first, we have
whom Christ died or gave himself for, even his church; secondly, what he
obtained for it,—holiness and righteousness, a freedom from the spots and
blemishes of sin, that is, the grace of justification and sanctity: “He made
him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness
of God in him,” 2 Corinthians 5:21. And, lastly, he died to purchase for us “an
eternal inheritance,” Hebrews 9:15. So that both grace and glory are bestowed
on them for whom he died, as the immediate fruits of his death and passion.
Secondly, See what the Scripture
rJhtw~v, “expressly,” assigneth
as the proper end and immediate effect (according to the purpose of God and his
own intention) of the effusion of the blood of Jesus Christ, and you shall find
that he intended by it to take away the sins of many; to “make his soul an
offering for sin,” that he might “see his seed,” that “the pleasure of the LORD
might prosper in his hand,” Isaiah 53:10; to be “a ransom for many,” Matthew
20:28; to “bear the sins of many,” Hebrews 9:28. He “bare our sins in his own
body on the tree, that we should live unto righteousness,” 1 Peter 2:24; that
“we might be made the righteousness of God in him,” 2 Corinthians 5:21; thereby
reconciling us unto God, verse 19. He died to “reconcile us unto God, in the
body of his flesh through death,” that we might be “holy and unblamable,”
Colossians 1:21,22; to “purge our sins,” Hebrews 1:3; to “obtain eternal
redemption for us,” chap. 9:12. So that if Christ by his death obtained what he
did intend, he hath purchased for us not only a possibility of salvation, but
holiness, righteousness, reconciliation with God, justification freedom from
the guilt and condemning power of sin, everlasting redemption, eternal life and
glory in heaven.
Thirdly, I appeal unto the
conscience of all Christians,—First, Whether they do not suppose the very
foundation of all their consolation to be stricken at, when they shall find
those places of Scripture (Hebrews 9:12,14, 15, 24, 28; Isaiah 53:10; I John
2:2, etc) that affirm Christ to have died to take away our sins, to reconcile
us unto God, to put away or abolish our transgressions, to wash and regenerate
us, perfectly to save us, and purchase for us an everlasting redemption,
whereby he is become unto us righteousness, and redemption, and sanctification,
the Lord our righteousness, and we become the righteousness of God in him, to
be so wrested as if he should be said only to have done something from which
these things might happily follow?
Secondly, Whether they
think it not a ready way to impair their love and to weaken their faith in
Christ, when they shall be taught that Christ hath done no more for them than
for those that are damned in hell; that, be their assurance never so great that
Christ died for them, yet there is enough to be laid to their charge to condemn
them; that though God is said to have reconciled them unto himself in Christ,
Colossians 1:19,20, yet indeed he is as angry with them as with any reprobate
in the world; that God loveth us not first, but so long as we continue in a
state of enmity against him, before our conversion, he continues our enemy
also, so that the first act of friendship or love must be performed on our
part, notwithstanding that the Scripture saith, “When we were enemies, we were
reconciled unto God,” Romans 5:10?
Thirdly, Whether they
have not hitherto supposed themselves bound to believe that Christ died for
their sins, and rose for their justification? Do they not think it lawful to
pray that God would bestow upon them grace and glory for Christ’s sake? and to
believe that Jesus Christ was such a mediator of the new covenant as procured
for the persons covenanted withal all the good things comprehended in the promise
of that covenant?
I will not farther press upon
this prevarication agaist Christian religion; only, I would desire all the
lovers of Jesus Christ seriously to consider whether these men do truly aim at
his honor and advancing the dignity of his merit, and not rather at the crying
up of their own endeavors, seeing the sole cause of their denying these
glorious effects of the blood of Christ is to appropriate the praise of them
unto themselves; as we shall see in the next chapter.
These charges are never to be
waived by the vanity of their sophistical distinctions, as of that of
impetration and application; which, though it may be received in an orthodox
meaning, yet not in that sense, or rather nonsense, whereunto they abuse
it;—namely, as though Christ had obtained that for some which shall never be
imparted unto them; that all the blessings procured by his death are proper to
none, but pendent in the air for them that can or will catch them: whereupon,
when we object [xiv][xiv] [14] that
by this means all the efficacy of the merit of Christ is in our own power, they
readily grant it, and say it cannot otherwise be. Let them that can, receive
these monsters in Christianity; for my part, in these following contradictory
assertions I will choose rather to adhere to the authority of the word of God
than of Arminius and his sectaries:—
S.S.
|
Lib. Arbit.
|
“He made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him,” 2 Corinthians 5:21. “He loved
the church, and gave himself for it; that he might present it unto himself a
glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing,” Ephesians
5:25,27.
|
“The immediate effect of the death of Christ is not the
remission of sins, or the actual redemption of any,” Armin. “Christ did not
properly die to save any one,” Grevinch.
|
“God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself,”
2 Corinthians 5:19.
|
“A potential and conditionate reconciliation, not actual
and absolute, is obtained by the death of Christ,” Corv.
|
“When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he
shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD
shall prosper in his hand,” Isaiah 53:10.
|
“I believe it might have come to pass that the death of
Christ might have had its end, though never any man had believed,” Corv.
|
“By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify
many; for he shall bear their iniquities,” Isaiah 53:11.
|
“The death and satisfaction of Christ being accomplished,
yet it may so come to pass that, none at all fulfilling the condition of the
new covenant, none might be saved,” Idem.
|
“Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many,”
Hebrews 9:28. “By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place,
having obtained eternal redemption for us,” chapter 9:12. “He hath reconciled
you in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy, and
unblamable, and unreprovable,” Colossians 1:21,22.
|
“The impetration of salvation for all, by the death of
Christ, is nothing but the obtaining of a possibility thereof; that God,
without wronging his justice, may open unto them a gate of mercy, to be
entered on some condition,” Rem. Coll. Hag.
|
“Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins,”
etc.: “that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus,”
Romans 3:25,26.
|
“Notwithstanding the death of Christ, God might have
assigned any other condition of salvation as well as faith, or have chosen
the Jews following the righteousness of the law,” Grevinch.
|
“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the
tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose
stripes we were healed,” 1 Peter 2:24.
|
“Why, then, the efficacy of the death of Christ depends
wholly on us.” “True; it cannot otherwise be,” Rem. Apol.
|
ENDNOTES:
[xv][xv] [1] Molin. Suffrag. ad Synod. Dordra.
[xvi][xvi] [2] “Immediata morris Christi effectio,
ac passionis, illa est non actualis peccatorum ab his aut illis ablatio, non
actualis remissio, non justificatio, non actualis horum aut illorum redemptio.”—Armin.
Antip., p. 76.
[xvii][xvii] [3] “Reconciliatio potentialis et
conditionata non actualis et absoluta, per mortem Christi impetratur.”—Corv. ad
Molin., cap. 28. sect. 11.
[xviii][xviii] [4] “Remissionis, justificationis, et
redemptionis, apud Deum impetratio, qua factum est, ut Deus jam possit, utpote
justitia cui satisfactum est non obstante, hominibus peccatoribus peccata
remittere.”—Armin., ubi sup.
[xix][xix] [5] “Autoris mens non est alia, quam
effuso sanguine Christi reconciliandi mundum Deo jus impetratum fuisse, et
inito novo foedere et gratioso curn hominibus, Deum gratiae ostium omnibus
denuo, poenitentiae ac verae in Christum fidei lege, adaperuisse.”—Epistol. ad
Wal., p. 93.
[xx][xx] [6] “Potuisset Deus, si ita sapientiae
suae visum fuisset, operarios, Judaeos, vel alios etiam praeter fideles
eligere, quia potuit aliam salutis conditionem, quam fidem in Christum
exigere.”—Grevinch, ad Ames., p. 415.
[xxi][xxi] [7] “Christus non est proprie mortuus
ad aliquem salvandum.”—Idem, ibid, p. 8.
[xxii][xxii] [8] “Postquam impetratio praestita ac
peracta esset, Deo jus suum integrum mansit, pro arbitrio suo, eam applicare,
vel non applicare; nec applicatio finis impetrationis proprie fuit, sed jus et
potestas applicandi, quibus et qualibus vellet.”—p. 9.
[xxiii][xxiii] [9] “Fides non est impetrata merito
Christi,” etc.—Corv. ad Molin., cap. 28. p. 419.
[xxiv][xxiv] [10] “Se omnino credere, futurum
fuisse, ut finis mortis Christi constaret, etiamsi nemo credidisset.”—Idem,
cap. 27, sect. 3,4.
[xxv][xxv] [11] “Posita et praestita Christi morte
et satisfactione, fieri potest, ut, nemine novi foederis conditionem prastante,
nemo salvaretur.”—Idem. Grevinch. ad Ames. p. 9.
[xxvi][xxvi] [12] “Impetratio salutis pro omnibus,
est acquisitio possibilitatis, ut nimirum Deus, illaesa sua justitia, hominem
peccatorem possit recipere in gratiam.”—Rem. Coll. Hag., p. 172.
[xxvii][xxvii] [13] “Pro Juda ac Petro mortuus est
Christus, et pro Simone Mago et Juda tam quam pro Paulo et Petro.”—Rem. Synod,
p. 320.
[xxviii][xxviii] [14] “Sic efficacia meriti Christi tota
penes nos stabit, qui vocationem alioqui inefficacem, efficacem reddimus; sane,
fieri aliter non potest.”—Rem. Apol., p. 93.
http://www.sounddoctrine.net/