Fourthly, This whole assertion tends to make Christ but a half mediator, that should procure the end, but not the means conducing thereunto. So that, notwithstanding this exception and new dis- tinction, our assertion stands firm, — That the fruits of the death of Christ, in respect of impetration of good and application to us, ought not to be divided; and our arguments to confirm it are un- shaken.
For a close of all ; that which in this cause we affirm may be sum- med up in this: Christ did not die for any upon condition, if they do believe; but he died for all God's elect, that they should believe, and believing have eternal life. Faith itself is among the principal effects and fruits of the death of Christ; as shall be declared. It is nowhere said in Scripture, nor can it reasonably be affirmed, that if we believe, Christ died for us, as though our beheving should make that to be which otherwise was not, — the act create the object; but Christ died for us that we might believe. Salvation, indeed, is be- stowed conditionally ; but faith, which is the condition, is absolutely procured. The question being thus stated, the difference laid open, and the thing in controversy made known, we proceed, in the next place, to draw forth some of those arguments, demonstrations, testi- monies, and proofs, whereby the truth we maintain is established, in which it is contained, and upon which it is firmly founded : only desir- ing the reader to retain some notions in his mind of those funda-
236 THE DEATH OF DEATH. [BOOK III,
mentals which in general we laid down before ; they standing in such relation to the arguments which we shall use, that I am confident not one of them can be thoroughly answered before they be everted.
BOOK III. CHAPTER I.
Arguments against the universality of redemption — The two first; from the nature of the new covenant, and the dispensation thereof.
Argument I. The first argument may be taken from the nature of the covenant of grace, which was established, ratified, and con- firmed in and by the death of Christ ; that Avas the testament whereof he was the testator, which was ratified in his death, and whence his blood is called " The blood of the new testament," Matt. xxvi. 28. Neither can any effects thereof be extended beyond the comjjass of this covenant. But now this covenant was not made universally Avitli all, but particularly only with some, and therefore those alone were intended in the benefits of the death of Christ.
The assumption appears from the nature of the covenant itself, described clearly, Jer. xxxi. 31, 32, " I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and Avith the house of Judah : not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, though I was an husband to them, saith the Lord;" — and Heb. viii. 9-11, " Not according to the covenant that I made w ith their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt ; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord ; I will put my laws in their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people : and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord : for all shall know me, from the least to the gi'eatest." Wherein, first, the condition of the covenant is not said to be required, but it is absolutely promised : " I will put my fear in their hearts." And this is the main difference between the old covenant of works and the new one of grace, that in that (he Lord ilid only re({uire the fulfilling "<f the condition prescribed, but in this be promisctli to eftect it in Chi.himself with whom the covenant is made. And without this
AEGUMENTS AGAINST UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION. 237
spiritual efficacy, the truth is, the new covenant would be as weak and unprofitable, for the end of a covenant (the bringing of us and binding of us to God), as the old. For in what consisted the weakness and unprofitableness of the old covenant, for which God in his mercy abolished it? AVas it not in tliis, because, by reason of sin, we were no way able to fulfil the condition thereof, " Do this, and live?" Otherwise the connection is still true, that " he that doeth these things shall live." And are we of ourselves any way more able to fulfil the condition of the new covenant? Is it not as easy for a man by his own strength to fulfil the whole law, as to repent and savingly believe the promise of the gospel? This, then, is one main difference of these two covenants, — that the Lord did in the old only require the condition ; now, in the new, he will also effect it in all the federates, to whom this covenant is extended. And if the Lord should only exact the obedience required in the covenant of us, and not work and effect it also in us, the new covenant would be a show to increase our misery, and not a serious imparting and communicating of grace and mercy. If, then, this be the nature of the new testament, — as appears from the very words of it, and might abundantly be proved, — that the condition of the covenant should certainly, by free grace, be wrought and accomplished in all that are taken into covenant, then no more are in this covenant than in whom those conditions of it are effected.