First, The seed of the woman was not to be a public person in the place, stead, and room of the seed of the serpent. Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman %ar i^oyj^r all the reprobates, as was before proved, are the seed of the serpent : therefore, Jesus Christ was not, in his oblation and suffering, when he brake the head of the father of the seed, a public person in their room.
Secondly, Christ, as a public person, representeth only them for whose sake he set himself apart to that office and employment where- in he was such a representative ; but upon his own testimony, which we have, John xvii. 19, he set himself apart to the service and employment wherein he was a public person for the sakes only of some that were given him out of the world, and not of all and every one: therefore, he was not a public person in the room of all.
Thirdly, Christ was a " surety," as he was a public person, Heb. vii. 22 ; but he was not a surety for all, — for, first, All are not taken into that covenant whereof he was a surety, whose conditions are effected in all the covenantees, as before; secondly. None can perish for whom Christ is a surety, unless he be not able to pay the debt: — therefore, he was not a public person in the room of all.
Fourthly, For whom he was a public person, in their rooms he suf- fered, and for them he made satisfaction, Isa. liii. 5, 6; but he suf- fered not in the stead of all, nor made satisfaction for all, — for, first. Some must suffer themselves, which makes it evident that Christ did not suffer for them, Rom. viii. 33, 34; and, secondly, The jus-
OBJECTIONS AND TEXTS OF SCEIPTURE CONSIDERED. 859
tice of God requiretli satisfaction from themselves, to the payment of the utmost farthing.
Fifthly, Jesus Christ, as a public person, did nothing in vain in respect of any for whom he was a public person; but many things which Christ, as a public person, did perform were altogether in vain and fruitless, in respect of the greatest part of the sons of men being under an incapability of receiving any good by any thing he did, — to wit, all that then were actually damned, in respect of whom, redemp- tion, reconciliation, satisfaction, and the like, could possibly be no other than empty names.
Sixthly, If God were well pleased with his Son in what he did, as a public person, in his representation of others (as he was, Eph. v. 2), then must he also be well pleased with them whom he did represent, either absolutely or conditionally; but with many of the sous of men God, in the representation of his Son, was not well pleased, neither absolutely nor conditionally, — to wit, with Cain, Pharaoh, Saul, Ahab, and others, dead and damned before : therefore, Christ did not, as a public person, represent all.
Seventhly, For testimonies, see John xvii. 9 ; Matt. xx. 28, xxvi. 26-28; Mark. x. 45; Heb. vi. 20; Isa. liii. 12; John x. 15; Heb. xiii. 20; Matt. i. 21; Heb. ii. 17; John xi. 51, 52; Acts xx. 28; Epk v. 2, 23-25 ; Rom. viii. 33, 34.
CHAPTER V.
The last argument from Scripture answered.
III. I COME, in the next place, to the third and last argument, drawn from the Scripture, wherewith the Arminians and their suc- cessors (as to this point) do strive to maintain their figment of uni- versal redemption ; and it is taken from such texts of Scripture as seem to hold out the perishing of some of them for whom Christ died, and the fruitlessness of his blood in respect of divers for whom it was shed. And on this theme their wits are AvonderfuUy luxuriant, and they are full of rhetorical strains to set out the unsuccessfulness and fruitlessness of the blood of Christ in respect of the most for whom it was shed, with the perishing of bought, purged, reconciled si)mera Who can but believe that this persuasion tends to the consolation of poor souls, whose strongest defence lieth in making vile the precious blood of the Lamb, yea, trampling upon it, and esteeming it as a common thing? But, friends, let me tell you, I a,m persuaded it was not so unvaluable in the eyes of his Father as to cause it to be poured out in vain, in respect of any one soul. But seeing we must be put to this defence, — wherein we cannot but rejoice, it tending so evidently
oGO THE DEATH OF DEATH. [BOOK IV.
to the honour of our blessed Saviour, — ^let us consider what can be said by Cliristians (at least in name) to enervate the efficacy of the blood-shedding, of the death of him after whose name they desli-e to be called. Thus, then, they argue: —
" If Christ died for reprobates and those that perish, then he died for all and every one, for confessedly he died for the elect and those that are saved ; but he died for reprobates, and them that perish : therefore," etc.
A71S. For the assumption, or second proposition of this argument, we shall do what we conceive was fit for all the elect of God to do, — positively deny it (taking the death of Christ, here said to be for them, to be considered not in respect of its own internal worth and sufficiency, but, as it was intended by the Father and Son, in respect of them for whom he died). We deny, then, I say, that Christ, by the command of his Father, and with intention to make satisfaction for sins, did lay down his life for reprobates and them that perish.