First, The proposition of this argument is clear, evident, and ac- knowledged by all professing the name of Christ; but yet universally with this caution and proviso, that by the Scripture affirming any tiling in plain words that is to he believed, you understand the plain sense of those words, which is clear by rules of interpretation so to be. It is the thing signified that is to be believed, and not the words only, which are the sign thereof; and, therefore, the plain sense and mean- ing is that which we must inquire after, and is intended when we speak of believing plain words of the Scripture. But now if by plain vjords you understand the literal importance of the words, which may perhaps be figurative, or at least of various signification, and capable of extension or restriction in the interpretation, then there is nothing more false than this assertion ; for how can you then avoid the blasphemous folly of the Anthropomorphites, assigning a body and human shape unto God, the plain words of the Scripture often men- tioning his eyes, hands, ears, etc., it being apparent to every child that the true importance of those expressions answers not at all their gross carnal conception? Will not also transubstantiation, or its younger brother consubstantiation, be an article of our creed ? With this limita- tion, then, we pass the proposition, with the places of Scripture brought to confirm it ; only with this observation, that there is not one of them to the purpose in hand, — which, because they do not relate to the ar- gument in consideration, we only leave to men's silent judgments.
Secondly, The assumption, or minor proposition, we absolutely deny as to some part of it ; as that Christ should be said to give him-
VOL. X. 24
370 THE DEATH OF DEATH. [BOOK IV.
self a ransom for every man, it being neither often, nor once, nor plainly, nor obscurely affirmed in the Scripture, nor at all proved in the place referred unto : so that this is but an empty flourishing. For the other exj)ression, of " tasting death for every man," we grant that the words are found Heb. ii. 9 ; but we deny that every man doth always necessarily signify all and every man in the world. 'NouOiroZv- ng 'Travra avdpuTov, Kcti diBdffxovrsg vdvra dvdpM'irov, Col. i. 28, — " Warning every man, and teaching every man." Every man is not there every man in the world ; neither are we to believe that Paul warned and taught every particular man, for it is false and impossible. So that every man, in the Scripture, is not universally collective of all of all sorts, but either distributive, for some of all sorts, or collective, with a restriction to all of some sort ; as in that of Paul, every man, was only of those to whom he had preached the gospel. Secondly, In the original there is only 'wwip iravrdg,for every, without the substantive rtian, which might be supplied by other words as well as man, — as elect, or believer.
Thirdly, That every one is there clearly restrained to all the mem- bers of Christ, and the children by him brought to gloiy, we have before declared. So that this place is no way useful for the confir- mation of the assumption, which we deny in the sense intended; and are sure we shall never see a clear, or so much as a probable, testi- mony for the confirming of it.
To the conclusion of the syllogism, the author, to manifest his skill in disputing in such an argumentative way as he undertaketh, addeth some farther proofs. Conscious, it seems, he was to himself that it had little strength from the propositions from which it is enforced ; and, therefore, thought to give some new supportments to it, although with very ill success, as will easily appear to any one that shall but consult the places quoted, and consider the business in hand. In the meantime, this new logic, of filing proofs to the conclusion which are suitable to neither proposition, and striving to give strength to that by new testimony which it hath not from the premises, deserves our notice in this age of learned writers. " Heu quantum est sapere." Such logic is fit to maintain such divinity. And so much for the first argument.
II. " Those whom Jesus Christ and his apostles, in plain terms, without any exception or restraint, affirm that Christ came to save, and to that end died, and gave himself a ransom for, and is a pro- pitiation for their sin, he certainly did come to save, and gave himself a ransom for them, and is the propitiation for their sins. Matt, xxvi, 24; John vi. 88; 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4; Heb. x. 7; John viii. 38, 45; 2 Pet. i. 16; Heb. ii. 3, 4;
" But Jesus Christ and his apostles have, in plain terms, affirmed that 'Christ came to save sinners,' 1 Tim. i. 15 ; the 'world,' John iii. 17; that he died for the 'unjust,' 1 Pet. iii. 18; the 'ungodly,' Kom. v. 6;
OBJECTIONS AND TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE CONSIDERED. 371
for ' every man/ Heb. ii. 9 ; ' gave himself a ransom for all men/ 1 Tim. ii. 6; and is the ' propitiation for the sins of the whole world/ 1 John ii. 2 ; and every one of these affirmations without any exception or re- straint, all being unjust, ungodly, sinners, and men, and of the world, Rom. iii. 10, 19, 20, 23; Eph. ii. 1-3; Tit. iii. 3; John iii. 4, 6: