[2.] The purchase of Christ being completed, by the performance of all things by divine constitution thereunto allotted,® and himself acquitted and exonerated of
^ 'Paov TO fi&>/^i7ff^ai, ii fii/ii7ff^ai.
2 " Lex aut punit, aut vetat, aut permittit, aut consulit, aut hortatur."— F. de Leg. 1 John iii. 4. " Decretum nil ponit in esse, prEedestinatio in prtEdestinato." — Aquin. JEph. i. 4; 2Pet. i. 1. 4 "Cur urceus exit?" 5 Isa. 1. 5-9.
6 John xvii. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 16; John xvii. ; Heb. ix. 14.
478 OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST.
the whole debt of their sin for whom he suffered, which was charged on him, he makes demand of the accomplishment of the fore-mentioned engagement made to him, concerning the freedom and deliverance of the persons whose sins were laiil on him, and whose bringing unto glory he undertook.
On these two, I say, it is that our right to the ft-uits of the death of Christ, even before believing, doth depend; from hence, at least, it is right and equal that we do, in the time appointed, enjoy these things. Yea, to say that we have right, upon believing, to the fruits of the death of Christ, affirmed universally, can only be affirmed of a jus in re, such a right as hath, at least in part, conjoined actual possession, believing itself being no small portion of these fruits.
This argument, then, being fallacious, omitting the chief causes in enumeration, includes not the thing proposed. Besides, it is in no small measure faulty, in that the first thing proposed to be confirmed was, that remission of sin and justifi- cation are not the inmiediate effects of Christ's death, whereof in this argument there is ol/Ti ypu,
2. " If God ' hate all workers of iniquity,' and we are all ' by nature the chil- dren of wrath,' and ' without faith it is impossible to please God,' and ' he that believeth not is condemned already,' then certainly the elect, while they are unbe- lievers, are not actually de facto, no, nor in personal right, delivered from this hatred, wrath, displeasure, and condemnation; but, etc.: ergo."
(1.) This argument, for what indeed it will prove, is handled at large in my treatise of Redemption, as also re-urged in the pages foregoing. Against actual justification from eternity it hath its efficacy.
(2.) It doth also conclude that the elect, whilst unbelievers, are not actually and de facto put in possession of the issues of love, faith being with the first of them. But,—
(3.) That they have not, upon the grounds fore-mentioned, a right to these things; or, —
(4.) That justification is not the immediate effect of the death of Christ (being the sole things in question), it hath the same unhappiness with the former, not once to mention.
3. "If we are justified only by faith, then certainly not before faith ; but we are justified only by faith: ergo."
(1.) If I mistake not, it is not justification before faith, but a right to the fruits of the death of Christ before faith, that is to be proved.
(2.) That justification is not the immediate effect of the death of Christ; to which ends for this ai-gumcnt, " valeat quantum valere potest ;" to me it comes not within many miles of the thing in question: so that, with the absurd answers supposed thereunto, we pass it by. it
The like also I am enforced to say of the two others that follow, being of the same length and breadth with those foregoing, — too short and narrow to cover the things in question ; so that though they may have their strength to their own proper end, yet as to the things proposed to be proved, there is nothhig in their genuine conclusions looking that way.
If I might take the lil)erty of guessing, I should suppose the mistake which led this author to all this labour in vain is, that the immediate effects of the death of Christ must be immediately enjoyed by them for whom he died ; which assertion hath not indeed the least colour of truth. The effects of the death oi Christ are not said to be immediate in reference to others' enjoyment of them, but unto their causality by that death. Whatever it be that in the first place is made out to sinners for the death of Christ, whenever it be done, that is the innnediate effect thereof as to them ; as to them, I say, for in its first tendency, it hath a more im- mediate object.
If Mr Baxter go on with his intentions about a tract concerning luiiversal re-
SUNDEY OBJECTIONS EEMOVED. 479
demption, perhaps we may have these things cleared; and yet, we must tell him beforehand, that if he draw forth nothing on that subject but what is done by Amyraldus, and hke things to them, he will give httle satisfaction to learned and stable men upon the issue of his undertaking. I shall not presume to take another man's task out of his hand, especially one's who is so every way able to go through with it ; else I durst undertake to demonstrate that treatise of Amyraldus, men- tioned by Mr Baxter, to be full of weak and sophistical argumentations, absurd contradictions, vain strife of words, and, in sum, to be as birthless a tympanous endeavour as ever so learned a man was engaged in.