Chapter 6

The title pretends satisfaction to them who desire to have reason satisfied, which that it is a great undertaking, I easily grant. That ever Christian reason, rightly informed by the word of God, should be satisfied with any doctrine so discrepant from the word, so full of contradiction in itself and to its own principles, as the doctrine of universal Redemption is, I should much marvel. I am persuaded that the author of the arguments following will fail of his intention with all that have so much reason as to know how to make use of reason, and so much grace as not to love darkness more than light.

Argument 1: That which the Scripture often and plainly affirms in plain words is certainly true and to be believed (Proverbs 22:20-21; Isaiah 8:20; 2 Peter 1:19-20). But that Jesus Christ gave himself a ransom, and by the grace of God tasted death for every man, is often and plainly affirmed in Scripture, as is shown before.

Therefore the same is certainly a truth to be believed (John 20:31; Acts 26:27).

The proposition of this Argument is clear, evident, and acknowledged by all professing the name of Christ — but with this proviso: that by the Scripture affirming anything in plain words to be believed, you understand the plain sense of those words, which is clear by rules of interpretation. It is the thing signified that is to be believed, and not the words only, which are the sign thereof. If by 'plain words' you understand the literal importance of the words, which may perhaps be figurative or of various signification, 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?

Secondly, the Assumption we absolutely deny as to some part of it — that Christ should be said to give himself a Ransom for every man — it being neither often, nor once, nor plainly, nor obscurely affirmed in the Scripture. For the expression 'tasting death for every man' (Hebrews 2:9), we grant the words are found there; but we deny that 'every man' does always necessarily signify all and every man in the world. 'Warning every man and teaching every man' (Colossians 1:28): every man is not there every man in the world, nor can we 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.

Thirdly, that 'every one' is there clearly restrained to all the members of Christ and the children by him brought to glory, we have before declared. So that this place is no way useful for the confirmation of the Assumption, which we deny in the sense intended.

To the conclusion of the syllogism, the Author adds some further proofs, conscious it seems that it had little strength from the propositions. Such logic is fit to maintain such Divinity.

Argument 2: Those for 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 propitiation for the sin — he certainly did come to save, and gave himself a ransom for them, and is the propitiation for their sins.

But Jesus Christ and his Apostles have in plain terms affirmed that Christ came to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), the world (John 3:17), that he died for the unjust (1 Peter 3:18), the ungodly (Romans 5:6), for every man (Hebrews 2:9), gave himself a ransom for all men (1 Timothy 2:6), and is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2) — and every one of these affirmations without any exception or restraint.

Therefore Jesus Christ came to save, died and gave himself a ransom for all men, and is the propitiation for their sins (John 1:29).

To the proposition of this argument I desire only to observe that we do not affirm that the Scripture does in any place lay an exception or restraint upon those persons for whom Christ is said to die, as though in one place it should be affirmed he died for all men, and in another some exception against it. Only we say, one place of Scripture interprets another, and declares that sense which before in one place was ambiguous and doubtful. When the Scripture shows that Christ died or gave himself a ransom for all, we believe it: and when in another place it declares that 'all' to be his Church, his Elect, his sheep, all believers, some of all sorts out of all kindreds and nations and tongues under heaven, this is not to lay an exception or restraint upon what was said before, but only to declare that the all for which he gave himself for a ransom were all his Church, all his elect, all his sheep, some of all sorts.

The assumption affirms that Christ and his Apostles say that he died to save sinners, unjust, ungodly, the world, all; whereupon the conclusion ought barely to be: Therefore Christ died for sinners, unjust, ungodly, the world, and the like. The whole strength of this Argument lies in turning indefinite propositions into universals: concluding that because Christ died for sinners, therefore he died for all sinners. If you extend the words in the conclusion no further than the intention of them in the places of Scripture recited in the Assumption, we may safely grant the whole: namely, that Christ died for sinners and the world, for sinful men in their several generations living therein. But if you intend a universality collective of all in the conclusion, then the syllogism is sophistical and false.

Fourthly, for particular places of Scripture urged — 1 Timothy 1:15, 1 Peter 3:18, Romans 5:6, 1 John 3:17, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 2:2 — these have been already considered. Romans 3:10, 19, 23; Ephesians 2:1-3; Titus 3:3; John 3:4 — these prove that all are sinners and children of wrath; but of Christ's dying for all sinners, or for all those children of wrath, there is not the least intimation. This may suffice to answer to the two first Arguments.

Argument 3: That which the Scripture sets forth as one end of the death of Christ, and one ground and cause of God's exalting Christ to be the Lord and Judge of all, is certainly to be believed.

But the Scripture sets forth this for one end of the death and resurrection of Christ, that he might be the Lord of all (Romans 14:9; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15), and for that cause God has exalted him to be the Lord and Judge of all men (Romans 14:9, 11-12; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Philippians 2:7, 11; Acts 17:31; Romans 2:16). Therefore that Christ so died and rose again for all is a truth to be believed (1 Timothy 2:6-7).

Answer: The unlearned framing of this Argument, the uncouth expressions of the thing intended, and failing in particulars by the way, being to be ascribed to the person and not the cause, I shall not much trouble myself withal. His interpreting 'for this cause God exalted Christ' to mean his death and resurrection, when his resurrection wherein he was declared to be the Son of God with power (Romans 1:4) was itself a glorious part of his exaltation, exemplifies the weakness that abounds in this treatment. God give them understanding and repentance to the acknowledgment of the Truth.

Secondly, to this whole Argument as it lies before us, I have nothing to say but to entreat Master More that if the misery of our times should call upon him to write again, he would cease expressing his mind by syllogisms. He asserts and infers in the conclusion — strengthening it with a new testimony — what was not once dreamed of in either of the premises, they speaking of the exaltation of Christ to be Judge of all (which refers to his own glory), the conclusion being of his dying for all (which necessarily aims at their good). Were it not a noble design to banish all human learning and to establish such a way of arguing in the room thereof.

Thirdly, the force and sum of the Argument is this: Christ died and rose again that he might be Lord and Judge of all; therefore Christ died for all. Now ask what he means by dying for all, and the whole Treatise answers that it is a paying a ransom for them all, that they might be saved. How this can be extorted out of Christ's dominion over all, with his power of judging all committed to him — which also is extended to the Angels, for whom he died not — I confess it flies my thoughts.

The meaning of Argument 6 is that universal Redemption may be proved by the Scripture: which being the very thing in question, it constitutes no real argument. To the second proposition — that Christ gave himself a ransom for all and tasted death for all — this is the very word of Scripture and was never denied by any. The making of 'all' to mean all men and every man in both the places aimed at is your addition, and not the Scripture's assertion. If you intend to prove those 'all' to be all and every man of all ages and kinds, elect and reprobate, and not all his children, all his elect, all his sheep, all the children given him of God, some of all sorts, nations, tongues, and languages only — I will willingly join issue with you to search out the meaning of the word and mind of God in it.

Proof 1: God so loved the world that he gave his Son to be the Saviour of the world (1 John 4:14), and sends his servant to bear witness of his Son that all men through him might believe (John 1:4, 7), that whosoever believes on him might have everlasting life (John 3:16-17), and he is willing that all should come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) and be saved (1 Timothy 1:15).

Answer: The main, yes indeed the only thing to be proved is that those indefinite propositions in the Scripture concerning the death of Christ are to be understood universally — that the terms 'all' and 'world' signify all and every man in the world. To this there is nothing at all urged in this pretended proof, but only a few ambiguous places barely recited, with a false collection from them.

Answer: No ingenious man acquainted with this controversy will expect that I should spend many words about such poor flourishes, vain repetitions, confused expressions, and illogical deductions as this pretended new Argument — indeed the same as the two first and with almost all that follow. I answer: First, that whatever the Scripture holds forth as a truth to be believed is certainly so and to be embraced. Second, that the Scripture sets forth the death of Christ, to all to whom the Gospel is preached, as an all-sufficient means for the bringing of sinners unto God, so that whoever believes and comes in unto him shall certainly be saved. Third, what can be concluded hence but that the death of Christ is of such infinite value as to be able to save every one to whom it is made known, if by true faith they obtain an interest therein? Fourth, the conclusion should at least include and express the whole and entire assertion contained in the Proposition — namely that Christ is so set forth as Savior of the world that whoever of the particulars believes, etc. — which we fully grant, as making nothing at all for the universality of Redemption, but only for the fullness and sufficiency of his satisfaction.

Argument 5: That which God will one day cause every man to confess to the glory of God is certainly a truth, for God will own no lie for his glory.

But God will one day cause every man to confess Jesus, by virtue of his death and ransom given, to be the Lord, even to the glory of God (Philippians 2:7-11; Isaiah 45:22-23; Romans 14:9, 12; Psalm 86:9).

Therefore it is certainly a truth that Jesus Christ has given himself a ransom for all men, and has thereby the right of lordship over them; and if any will not believe and come into this government, yet he abides faithful and cannot deny himself, but will one day bring them before him and cause them to confess him Lord to the glory of God, when they shall be denied by him for denying him in the days of his patience (2 Timothy 2:12-14; Matthew 10:32-33; 2 Corinthians 5:10).

Answer: The conclusion of this Argument ought to be thus, and no otherwise: 'Therefore, that Jesus Christ is the Lord and to be confessed to the glory of God is certainly a truth.' What is inserted concerning his giving himself a ransom for all, and what follows of the conviction and condemnation of those who believe not, is altogether heterogeneous to the business in hand. We do not ascribe a fruitless, ineffectual Redemption to Jesus Christ; we deny not that he shall also judge the Reprobates — all who know not, deny, and disobey the truth of his Gospel — and that all shall be convinced he is Lord of all at the last day. Secondly, for the clause 'by virtue of his death and ransom given,' we deny that it is anywhere in Scripture intimated that the ransom paid by Christ in his death was the cause of his exaltation to be Lord of all; it was his obedience to his Father in his death, and not his satisfaction for us, that is proposed as the antecedent of this exaltation (Philippians 2:7-11).

Argument 6: That which may be proved in and by the Scripture, both by plain sentences therein and necessary consequences imported thereby, without wrestling, wrangling, adding to, taking from, or altering the words of Scripture, is a truth to be believed.

But that Jesus Christ gave himself a ransom for all men, and by the grace of God tasted death for every man, may be proved in and by the Scripture by both plain sentences and necessary consequences, without any alteration of the words, as is already shown in chapters 7-13 — which will now be ordered into several proofs. Therefore that Jesus Christ gave himself for all men and by the grace of God tasted death for every man is a truth to be believed.

The meaning of this argument is that universal Redemption may be proved by Scripture — which being the very thing in question, there is no reason why it should itself serve as an argument except to make up a number. In answer: first, to the first proposition, the meaning I take to be this: what is affirmed in Scripture or may be deduced from it by just consequence is certainly to be believed — which is granted by all, and is the only foundation of that article of faith you seek to oppose. Second, to the second: that Christ gave himself a ransom for all and tasted death for all is the very word of Scripture and was never denied by anyone. Making 'all' to mean all people and every individual in both passages is your addition, not the Scripture's assertion. If you intend to prove that 'all' means all and every person, elect and reprobate, and not all his elect, his sheep, some of all sorts of nations and languages only — I will by the Lord's assistance willingly join issue with you to search out the meaning of the Word and mind of God in it. The assertion to be proved is that Jesus Christ, according to the counsel and will of his Father, in his own mind and intention, by his death paid a ransom for all and every person — elect and reprobate alike, both those saved and those who perish — and not only for his elect or church chosen before the foundation of the world. To confirm this, various passages have been produced which we shall consider in order.

Proof 1 of Argument 6.

God so loved the world that he gave his Son to be the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14), and sent his servant to bear witness of his Son that all people through him might believe (John 1:4, 7), that whoever believes on him might have everlasting life (John 3:16-17), and he is willing that all should come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) and be saved (1 Timothy 1:15), nor will he be wanting in sufficient help to those who, as light comes, suffer themselves to be wrought on and receive it (Proverbs 1:23; 8:4-5) — is not this plain in Scripture?

Answer.

In answer: first, the main — indeed the only — thing to be proved is that those indefinite propositions in Scripture concerning the death of Christ are to be understood universally: that the terms 'all' and 'world' signify, when they define the object of Christ's death, all and every person in the world. Unless this is demonstrated, all other labor is altogether useless and fruitless. Now toward this, nothing at all is urged in this pretended proof but a few ambiguous passages barely cited, with a false collection or observation drawn from them that they give no color to.

Answer regarding 1 John 4:14: God's sending his Son to be the Savior of the world is nothing but to be the Savior of men living in the world, which his Elect are. As for John 1:4, 7 — that all men through him might believe — the words of verse 7 refer to John the Baptist, not Christ: he was sent as a witness that all through him might believe. By 'all' here is meant only some of all sorts to whom his word came, so the necessary sense of the word 'all' here is wholly destructive to the proposition. As for what is urged from John 3:16-17, that God so sent his Son that whoever believes might have eternal life, as far as I know this is not under debate as to the sense among Christians. Regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 — God's willingness that all should be saved — I ask: what act of God does this willingness consist in? If it is the eternal purpose of his will that all should be saved, why is it not accomplished, for who has resisted his will? Grant that salvation is only to be had in Jesus Christ as a Redeemer, and give me an instance how God in any act has declared himself to all men of all times and places concerning his willingness of their salvation — and I will never more trouble you in this cause. By 'all men' we understand some of all sorts throughout the world. What follows in the close of this proof — of God not being wanting in sufficiency of helpfulness to those who suffer themselves to be wrought upon — is the whole Pelagian poison of free-will and Arminian sufficient grace, to neither of which there is the least witness given in the place produced.

The sum and meaning of the whole assertion is that there is a universality of sufficient grace granted to all, even grace enabling them to obedience — which is a position so contradictory to innumerable places of Scripture, so derogatory to the free grace of God, so destructive to the efficacy of it, such a clear exaltation of the old idol free-will into the throne of God, as anything that the decaying estate of Christianity has invented. So far is it from being plain and clear in Scripture, that it is universally repugnant to the whole dispensation of the new Covenant.

Proof 2.

The second proof: Jesus Christ the Son of God came into the world to save the world (John 12:47), to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), to take away our sins and destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:5, 8), to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29), and therefore died for all (2 Corinthians 5:14-15), and gave himself a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6), to save that which was lost (Matthew 18:11) — so his propitiation made was for the world (2 Corinthians 5:19), the whole world (1 John 2:2) — all of which is fully and plainly in Scripture.

Answer.

In answer: the passages in this proof that mention 'all' or 'world' — John 12:47, John 1:29, 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:19, 1 John 2:2 — have already all been considered, and I am unwilling to trouble the reader with repetitions. See those places, and I doubt not but you will find that they are so far from giving any strength to the thing intended to be proved, that they rather overturn it. As for the rest — 1 Timothy 1:15, Matthew 18:11, 1 John 3:5, 8 — I cannot see how anything can be extracted from them to give color to the universality of redemption, and what they make against it has been declared.

Proof 3.

The third proof: God in Christ does, in some means or other of his appointment, give some witness to all people of his mercy and goodness procured by Christ (Psalm 19:6; Romans 10:8; Acts 14:17), and thereby at one time or other sends forth some stirrings of his Spirit to move and knock at the hearts of people, to invite them to repentance and seeking God, and so to lay hold on the grace and salvation offered — and this not in show or pretense but in truth and good will ready to bestow it on them; and all this is fully testified in Scripture (Genesis 6:3; Isaiah 45:22; Acts 17:30-31; John 1:9).

Answer.

In answer: if universal redemption needs such proofs as these it has great need and little hope of support. Universal vocation is here asserted to maintain universal redemption — the two legs of the idol of free will set up for people to worship, each propping the other up when it stumbles. First, it is true that God at all times since the creation has called people to the knowledge of himself as the great Creator through the visible creation (Romans 1:19-20; Psalm 19:1-2; Acts 14:17). Second, that after the death of Christ, he did by the preaching of the Gospel call home to himself the children of God scattered abroad in the world (Mark 16:15; Romans 10:18; Acts 17:30-31). But third, that God should at all times, in all places and ages, grant means of grace or call to Christ as a Redeemer, with stirrings and motions of his Spirit for people to close with — this is so gross and groundless an imagination, so contrary to God's distinguishing mercy and contradictory to express passages of Scripture, that I wonder how anyone has the boldness to assert it. Let the reader consult Psalm 147:19-20, Matthew 11:25, Matthew 22:14, Acts 14:16, Acts 16:7, and Romans 10:14-15.

Proof 4.

The fourth proof: the Holy Spirit who comes from the Father and the Son shall convict the world of sin — because they believe not on Christ, and it is their sin that they have not believed on him. And how could it be their sin not to believe in Christ and they for that cause under sin, if there were neither enough in the atonement made by Christ for them, nor truth in God's offer of mercy to them, nor will nor power in the Spirit's moving sufficient to have brought them to believe at one time or other? And yet this is evident in Scripture (John 3:18-19; 8:24; 12:48; 15:22, 24; 16:8-11).

Answer.

The intention of this proof is to show that men shall be condemned for their unbelief — for not believing in Christ — which cannot be, says the author, unless three things be granted: first, that there is enough in the atonement made by Christ for them; second, that there is truth in God's offer of mercy to them; third, that there is sufficient will and power given them by the Spirit at some time to believe. To the first: if by 'enough in the atonement for them' you understand that the atonement has enough in it for them, we deny it not because the atonement lacks sufficiency, but because the atonement was not for them; if you mean there is a sufficiency in the merit of Christ to save them if they should believe, we grant it, and affirm this sufficiency is the chief ground of proposing it to those to whom the Gospel is preached. To the second: there is an eternal truth in God's offer of mercy, which is that God will assuredly bestow life and salvation upon all believers, the proffers being declarative of our duty and of the connection between faith and life — not at all of God's intention toward the particular soul to whom the offer is made. To the third: I say, first, that you set the cart before the horse, placing will before power; second, that I deny any internal assistance is required to render a man inexcusable for not believing if he has the object of faith propounded to him; third, how a man may be given a will to believe and yet not believe, I pray declare. The text in John 16:7-11 about the Spirit convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment principally intended the plentiful effusion of the Spirit upon the Apostles at Pentecost after the ascension of Christ — which abundantly did this in that sermon of Peter (Acts 3) when enemies and haters of Christ cried out, 'Men and brethren, what shall we do to be saved?' What this has to do with universal Redemption, let those that can understand it keep to themselves, for I am confident they will never be able to make it out to others.

Proof 5.

Proof 5 asserts that God has testified by his word and oath that Christ should work a redemption for all men, and that God wills that all come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4; John 3:17), and has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but rather that they turn and live (Ezekiel 18:23, 32; 33:11). And dare any say that the God of truth says and swears that of which he has no inward and serious meaning?

Answer.

Answer: First, the assertion that God testified by word and oath that Christ should save only 'so far' is a bold falsehood — God revealed that Christ saves to the uttermost those who come to him (Hebrews 7:25), not merely in some partial degree. Second, that Christ should bring all to the knowledge of the truth is another bold corruption of the word. Third, John 3:17 speaks of being fully saved from sins (Matthew 1:21) and to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25) — which confirms that only the world of God's elect is intended. In 1 Timothy 2:4, there is something of the will of God for saving all sorts of men, but nothing supporting the bold assertion here used. Fourth, Ezekiel 18:23, 32 might give some color to a general call to repentance, but gives no support to universal redemption, since there is no mention of Christ or his death in that passage. The words are addressed to the house of Israel alone (verse 25), not to all humanity. 'God wills not the death of a sinner' means either that God has purposed they shall not die — but then why do sinners die, his counsel being immutable? — or that he commands those he calls to do what leads to life. The entire passage in Ezekiel concerns God's temporal judgment on Israel for their sins; it has nothing to do with a universal design in the death of Christ.

Proof 6.

The very words and phrases used by the Holy Spirit in Scripture concerning the death of Christ — all nations (Matthew 28:19-20), the ends of the earth (Isaiah 45:22; 49:6), every creature (Mark 16:15), all (2 Corinthians 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:6), every man (Hebrews 2:9), the world (John 3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 5:19), the whole world (1 John 2:2), that which was lost (Luke 19:10), sinners (Matthew 9:13), the unjust (1 Peter 3:18), the ungodly (Romans 5:6) — imply no less than all people without exception. And since whoever repents and believes in Christ shall receive his grace (John 3:16, 18; Acts 10:43), would it not be pride and error to devise glosses that restrict the sense Scripture holds forth so fully for all people?

Answer.

In answer: first, this argument from words and phrases is essentially the same argument repeated throughout the whole book — it does no more than restate the very point under debate, namely whether 'all' and 'the world' are to be taken universally, and merely asserts that they are without proving it. Second, the places that speak of Christ dying for sinners, the ungodly, and that which was lost have already been shown to give no real support to universal redemption. Third, all the passages where 'all,' 'every man,' 'the world,' and 'the whole world' appear have been considered at length. Fourth, 'all nations' and 'every creature' refer to those to whom the Gospel is to be preached without national restriction — they do not encompass every individual at all times, and the command to preach the Gospel to all does not in the least prove that Christ died with the intention to redeem all. Fifth, 'the ends of the earth' in Isaiah 45:22 refers to those who look to God and are saved; and Christ being given as salvation to the ends of the earth (Isaiah 49:6) means gathering the preserved remnant of his elect — which is the correct interpretation of 'all' and 'the world' wherever they appear.

Proof 7.

The seventh proof argues that Scripture speaks of certain high and peculiar privileges of the Spirit belonging only to the saints and chosen of God, yet when these privileges are mentioned together with the ransom and propitiation they are not expressed in exclusive terms but with language that leaves room to apply the ransom to all people. Scripture says Christ died 'for his sheep' and 'for many,' but nowhere says 'only for his sheep' or 'only for many,' which the author takes as strong proof that the ransom is for all.

Answer.

The answer to the seventh proof is this: the claim that where these peculiar privileges are mentioned together with the ransom there is room to extend the ransom to all is said but never attempted to be proved. First, it is certain that all peculiar saving privileges belong only to God's elect, purchased for them alone by the blood of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:3-4); the death of Christ for them is itself among those privileges — he redeemed his church with his own blood (Acts 20:28), gave himself for it (Ephesians 5:25-26). Second, that room is merely asserted, not demonstrated. Third, whether 'many,' 'sheep,' or 'all' is used, the language concerning the ransom is handled identically in Scripture. Fourth, in several passages the ransom and peculiar privileges are so inseparably united that it is impossible to apply the privileges to some and extend the ransom to all — Revelation 5:9-10 assigns the redemption by blood precisely to those crowned ones distinguished from the rest of the nations, from among whom they were taken. Fifth, enough has been said before on the sheep passages.

Proof 8.

The eighth proof asserts that the restoration Christ wrought in his own body for humanity is as large and full for all people and of as much force as Adam's fall was for all people, Christ the second Adam being therefore a figure corresponding to the first Adam in universal scope (Romans 3:22-24; 5:12, 14, 18; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, 45-47).

Answer.

In answer: first, it is true that Christ and Adam are compared in Romans 5:12, 18, but the comparison concerns intensity of efficacy, not the extent of the object — the Apostle asserts that the righteousness of Christ is as effectual for justification as the transgression of Adam was for condemnation, Adam's sin communicating to all his natural seed, and Christ's righteousness to all his spiritual seed, the children given to him by the Father. Second, 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 speaks of the resurrection to glory by virtue of Christ's resurrection — verse 23 restricts those 'all' to all who are Christ's; the others shall also rise, but not to a resurrection of glory. Third, the comparison in verse 45 is between the principles of life each communicated to those ingrafted into them: Adam a living soul giving natural life, Christ a life-giving Spirit giving grace to his own. Fourth, Romans 3:23 — 'all have sinned' — was stated to show that salvation comes only through Christ; when Paul specifies to whom Christ's righteousness extends, he says plainly: 'unto all and upon all those who believe,' verse 22, whether Jew or Gentile.

Proof 9.

The Lord Jesus Christ has sent and commanded his servants to preach the Gospel to all nations and to every creature, and to tell them that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved (Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16), and his servants have so preached to all (2 Corinthians 5:19; Romans 10:13, 18). And our Lord Jesus Christ will make it appear one day that he has not sent his servants on a false errand, nor put a lie in their mouths, nor wished them to dissemble in offering to all what they knew belonged only to the few — but to speak truth (Isaiah 44:26; 61:8; 1 Timothy 1:12).

Answer.

The strength of this ninth proof is not easily apparent. First, it is true that Christ commanded his apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations and every creature — calling all people without distinction of persons or nations to repent and believe, except where the Spirit withheld them (Acts 16:6-7). Second, his servants did obey, beseeching people to be reconciled to God across the nations without discrimination (2 Corinthians 5:19-20; Romans 10:18). Third, it is most certain that Christ did not send his servants with a lie to offer what belonged only to some. But what follows from all this for universal redemption is not discernible. The Gospel has never been preached to every individual person — and the requirement is to prove that Christ died for all people, including those who never hear the Gospel. What do preachers of the Gospel offer? Life and salvation through Christ on the condition of faith and repentance — and the truth of that offer consists in this: that everyone who believes shall be saved, which truth stands firm as long as Christ is all-sufficient to save all who come to him. God has entrusted ministers with his commands and promises, not his secret purposes and counsels — and it is no lie to tell people 'he who believes shall be saved,' even if Christ did not die for some of them.

Proof 10.

The tenth proof: the Lord wills believers to pray even for the unjust and their persecutors (Matthew 5:44, 48; Luke 6:28), yes even for all people, yes even for kings and all in authority (1 Timothy 2:1, 4), on this ground: it is good in the sight of God who will have all people saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. Surely there is a door of life opened for all (2 Timothy 1:10).

Answer.

The strength of this proof rests on several unfounded assumptions. First, it supposes that indefinite assertions are equivalent to universal ones — which is false (Romans 4:5). Second, it supposes that 'all' in 1 Timothy 2:1 does not mean all sorts of people, when the Apostle's enumeration of various kinds plainly shows a distributive meaning. Third, it supposes we are bound to pray for every individual person that they may be saved — for which there is no warrant, rule, precept, or example in Scripture; it is contrary to the apostolic direction (1 John 5:16), to our Savior's example (John 17:9), and to the revealed counsel and purpose of God (Romans 9:11-12, 15; 11:7). Fourth, it supposes the only thing we are to pray for people is that they may be saved through Christ, which is obviously false (Jeremiah 29:7). Fifth, it supposes our ground for praying for anyone is assurance that Christ died for them in particular — which is not true (Acts 8:22, 24). From our duty to God's secret purpose is no valid conclusion, though from his command to our duty is most certain.

Proof 11.

The eleventh proof states that the Lord has given his word and promise to be with his servants as they preach the Gospel to all and as his people pray for all, so that they may proceed with confidence in both (Matthew 28:20; 1 Timothy 2:3, 8; Luke 10:6; Isaiah 54:17).

Answer.

That God will be with his people whether in preaching or praying according to his will and their duty is as apparent as it is obvious that this makes nothing for universal redemption.

Proof 12.

The Lord has already performed and made good his word to his servants and people, showing mercy to the very end — mercy to people of all sorts and all kinds of sinners — so that none might exclude themselves but all might be encouraged to repent, believe, and hope (Acts 2; 3; 8; 9; 10; 11; 16; 19; 28; 1 Corinthians 6:10-11; 1 Timothy 1:13-17).

Answer.

Had the author told us that God had already made good his word by saving every individual person and proved it clearly, he would have undeniably confirmed his main opinion. But by affirming only that God has shown mercy to some of all sorts and all kinds of sinners — so that others of the same sort might be induced to believe — he has actually betrayed his own cause and established that of his adversaries: showing that in the event God declares himself on their side, saving in the blood of Jesus only some of all sorts, not every individual.

Proof 13.

The thirteenth proof argues that the blessing of life has flowed in the doctrine of God's love to humanity, and that in the gracious discovery of the ransom given and atonement made by Christ for all people, God has in the first place overcome his chosen ones to believe and turn to God (Acts 13:48; Titus 2:11, 13; 3:4-5).

Answer.

In answer: first, the freedom of God's grace and the transcendence of his eternal love toward humanity, with the sending of his Son to die for them and recover them to himself from sin and Satan, is a most effectual motive for conversion — and we acknowledge this most willingly. But that this motive has ever been effectual by extending that love to all, or that any efficacy lies in that aggravation of it, we utterly deny. First, it is false and a corruption of the Word of God, and from a lie no good consequence can follow. Second, this notion destroys the efficacy of this heavenly motive by converting the most intense and incomparable love of God toward his elect into a common desire and failing affection contrary to his nature. Third, the passages cited contain none of this common love to all: the grace in Titus 2:11-13 is the grace that certainly brings salvation (not a common love) and came to redeem a peculiar people; so too the love and kindness in Titus 3:4-5 is that by which we receive the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit — a peculiar, not a common love. Fourth, Acts 13:47 speaks only of the extension of God's mercy through the Gospel to the Gentiles as well as the Jews, which is far from proving universal grace.

Proof 14.

The fourteenth proof urges that those who, when the Gospel and its spiritual light come to them, refuse to believe and are drawn away by other things, are said to love darkness rather than light (John 3:19), to follow lying vanities and forsake their own mercies (Jonah 2:8), to harden their own hearts (Romans 2:5), to lose their souls (Matthew 16:26), and to destroy themselves (Hosea 13:9). And since they had already fallen through Adam into darkness, hardness, and death, how could these things be said of them if no life had been obtained by Christ, no atonement made, no restoration of their souls, no means provided that they might be saved?

Answer.

First, the sum of this argument is: those who do not believe when the Gospel is preached are the causes of their own ruin and destruction; therefore Jesus Christ died for all and every person in the world. Though it might seem like wasted labor to answer such a non sequitur, a few observations are necessary lest any scruple remain with weaker readers. First, not all people have the Gospel preached to them — from the beginning of the world the greatest part of humanity has been passed over in the distribution of the means of grace (Romans 2; Acts 17); all such people must be excluded from this conclusion, which makes it entirely useless to the matter at hand, since the universality of redemption falls to the ground if even one soul is not included in the payment of the ransom. Second, what destroys people is not their failure to believe that Christ died for every individual soul (which Scripture nowhere requires as an article of faith), but their failure to trust in the all-sufficiency of Christ's passion for sinners, accepting the mercy obtained thereby on the terms set forth in the Gospel — terms which do not attend to God's purpose for whom Christ died, but to the sufficiency and efficacy of his death for all who receive him. Third, the other Scriptures cited — Jonah 2:8, Romans 2:5, Matthew 16:26, Hosea 13:9 — give no color to the argument; Jonah 2:8 concerns those who forsake the true God for idols and so forfeit their temporal and spiritual mercies; Romans 2:5 speaks of Gentiles who had the works of creation to instruct them and the patience of God to wait on them, yet hardened themselves further. Fourth, the conclusion of this proof seems to reveal a deeper intention — that all people are in a restored condition by Christ; not merely that a door of mercy is opened for all, but that all are actually restored into grace and favor, so that if they do not fall away they will certainly be saved. The argument for this is that since they fell in Adam into darkness and hardness, they could not be said to love darkness and harden themselves unless they had first been restored and enlightened by Christ. If this is the author's intention (as is too apparent), there are several things to say. First, as to the argument itself: this is equivalent to saying that because original sin makes people guilty of death, they cannot by actual sins aggravate their condemnation; or that because people are naturally blind they cannot be said to undervalue light. It is precisely because they are blind that they do so — and people who have time, opportunity, and means to save their souls may be said to lose them by their own fault. Second, as to the thing itself — the assertion of an actual restoration of all people by Christ into covenant: there is nothing in Scripture giving the least color to this gross error. It is contrary to very many passages affirming that we are dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1), that unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3), and that until one comes by faith to Christ the wrath of God remains on him (John 3:36), along with countless other passages showing the universal alienation of all people from God until actual peace and reconciliation is made through Christ. It is contrary to the very nature of the new covenant of grace, which proceeds from God's free mercy to his elect, is made with his own people in distinction from the world, and is effective in actually working every good thing promised in all to whom it belongs — which is certainly not all people. It is contrary to the eternal purpose of God in election and reprobation, the latter being a resolution to leave people in their fallen condition without any reparation by Christ. This position also carries many absurd consequences: first, all infants who die before actual sin must necessarily be saved, placing the infants of Turks, Pagans, and persecutors in a far happier condition than the apostles of Christ who died in maturity — yet Christ said that without being born again no one can see the kingdom of God (John 3:3), and Paul says the children of unbelievers are unclean (1 Corinthians 7:14), and no unclean thing shall enter the new Jerusalem (Revelation 21:27). Second, nothing more is required of anyone to be saved than remaining in the state in which he was born — when the whole Word of God declares that all who remain in that state shall certainly perish eternally. Third, every person who perishes in the whole world must have fallen away from the grace of the new covenant — yet its promises declare there shall never be a total falling away of those who are in covenant. Fourth, no one can come to Christ except those who have first fallen from him in their own persons, since all others already abide in him. Countless other absurdities follow necessarily from this false and heretical assertion, which is absolutely destructive to the free grace of God.

Proof 15.

The fifteenth proof urges God's earnest expostulations, pleadings, and protests to those many of whom perished (Romans 11:27; Isaiah 10:22) — such as: 'Oh that there were such a heart in them to fear me, that it might be well with them' (Deuteronomy 5:29); 'What more could have been done for my vineyard?' (Isaiah 5:4-5); 'What iniquity have your fathers found in me?' (Jeremiah 2:5); 'Oh my people, what have I done to you?' (Micah 6:3); 'How often would I have gathered you, and you would not' (Matthew 23:37); 'Because I called and you refused' (Proverbs 1:24-25, 32) — arguing that since God so pleads with all, a ransom must have been given for them and genuine mercy shown them.

Answer.

In answer: first, in all these expostulations there is no mention of any ransom given or atonement made for those who perish — they all concern temporal mercies and the outward means of grace. Second, all the passages cited (except Romans 1:28 and 2:5, which plainly ground the inexcusableness of sin on the knowledge available through creation and providence) are addressed only to those who enjoyed the means of grace — a very small portion of all humanity, so nothing can be concluded from them about God's mind toward all others (Psalm 147:19-20). Third, there are none who enjoy the means of grace who have not received so many mercies from God that he may justly plead with them about their ingratitude. Fourth, all the things God expostulates about for their lack — he could if he pleased effectually work them in human hearts by his exceeding power — so these expostulations cannot be declarative of his purpose. Fifth, desires and wishes should not properly be ascribed to God — these expressions are to be understood anthropomorphically. Sixth, all these are nothing but emphatic declarations of our duty, strong convictions of the disobedient, and a vindication of the excellence of God's ways; the conclusion 'therefore Christ died for all people' does not follow.

Proof 16.

The sixteenth proof urges the Scripture's manner of describing the sin of those who despise and refuse grace — that they turn the grace of God into wantonness (Jude 4), trample underfoot the Son of God, profane the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and insult the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29), deny the Lord who bought them (2 Peter 2:1), and perish, those for whom Christ died (1 Corinthians 8:11), being trees twice dead, plucked up by the roots (Jude 12-13), bringing upon themselves swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1). The argument is: how could all this be said of them if God had in no way given his Son for them, if Christ had shed no blood to procure their remission, if he had not bought them?

Answer.

First, the three scripture passages most frequently urged in this case — Hebrews 10:29, 2 Peter 2:1, and 1 Corinthians 8:11 — have already been considered at length elsewhere, where it was demonstrated that they in no way support what they are violently pressed to prove. Second, as for the passages from Jude, verses 4, 12, and 13, it is not apparent how they can be drawn into the matter at hand. Those who are said in verse 4 to 'turn the grace of God into wantonness' are abusing the doctrine of the Gospel to encourage themselves in sin — from which it is a strange inference to conclude that Christ died for all people, especially since the Apostle indicates that Christ did not die for these abusers of his grace, affirming that they were of old ordained to condemnation.

Proof 17.

The seventeenth proof argues that Jesus Christ by virtue of his death shall be the Judge of all, and that by the Gospel in which they might have been saved he will judge them to a second death — and how can this be if he never died the first death for them, and if there were no truth in the Gospel preached to them? (Romans 14:9-12; Philippians 2:7-11; Romans 2:16; John 12:47-48, 50)

Answer.

In answer: first, that Jesus Christ shall be Judge of all and that all judgment is committed to him is admitted; but it does not follow that he died for all — unless one will also affirm that he died for the devils, since they too must be judged by him. Second, that all people shall be judged by the Gospel — including those who never heard a word of it — is directly contrary to Scripture: 'as many as have sinned without the law will perish without the law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law' (Romans 2:12). Every person shall be judged according to the light and rule they did or might have enjoyed, not according to that of which they were invincibly deprived. Third, that Christ is said to die only 'the first death' is neither a Scriptural expression nor deducible from Scripture. Fourth, the implication that there is no truth in the Gospel preached unless Christ died for all is actually one of the most contrary assertions imaginable; the passages cited speak of Christ as Lord, exalted above all, Judge of all — but how they can be twisted to support universal atonement is not apparent.

Proof 18.

The eighteenth proof urges that believers are exhorted to contend for the faith of this common salvation once delivered to the saints (Jude 3-5), which some having heard oppose and others turn into wantonness; and that by not heeding and not walking in it, people deprive themselves of the salvation already wrought by Christ and wind themselves out of the salvation to come.

And every one of these proofs being plain and according to Scripture, and each of force — how much more altogether — still justifying the sense that 1 Timothy 2:6 and Hebrews 2:9 import, and the truth of the proposition at the beginning?

Answer.

In answer: all that can be found here is that the salvation purchased by Christ is called 'common salvation.' If the author concludes from this that it is common to all people, he might as well conclude that faith belongs to all people, since it is called 'the common faith' (Titus 1:4) — though also 'the faith of God's elect' (verse 1). There is a community of believers, and the common salvation is that by which they are all saved — having nothing to do with the strange kind of 'common salvation' maintained here, the kind whereby no one is in fact saved. The remainder of this proof is fullness of words suited to the author's persuasion but in large part exceedingly unsuitable to the Word of God and derogatory to the merits of Christ, making the salvation purchased by him in itself of no effect, left to the will of sinful and corrupted people to make effective or to reject.

These are the proofs which this author calls plain and according to Scripture — they amount to a recapitulation of nearly all that he has said in his whole book, with nothing of weight omitted. Whether the thing intended to be proved — the payment of a ransom by Christ for all and every person — is plainly and evidently confirmed from Scripture, as the author would have us believe; or whether this whole heap of words called arguments, reasons, and proofs is not in their manner of expression obscure, in their manner of inference childish, weak, and ridiculous, in their allegations and interpretations of Scripture perverse, violent, and in direct opposition to the revealed mind and will of God — this is left to the judgment of the Christian reader who shall examine them together with the answers annexed.

The title claims to satisfy those who want reason satisfied — which I readily grant is a tall order. That a properly informed Christian reason, guided by God's Word, could ever be satisfied with a doctrine so contrary to that Word, so filled with internal contradictions and conflicts with its own principles, as the doctrine of universal redemption is — I would find remarkable. I am persuaded that the author of the following arguments will fail to achieve his purpose with all who have enough reason to know how to use it, and enough grace not to love darkness more than light.

Argument 1: What Scripture often and plainly affirms in plain words is certainly true and to be believed (Proverbs 22:20-21; Isaiah 8:20; 2 Peter 1:19-20). But that Jesus Christ gave Himself as a ransom, and by the grace of God tasted death for every person, is often and plainly affirmed in Scripture, as has been shown.

Therefore this is certainly a truth to be believed (John 20:31; Acts 26:27).

The first premise of this argument is clear, evident, and acknowledged by all who profess the name of Christ — but with this qualification: that by Scripture affirming something in plain words to be believed, you mean the plain sense of those words as determined by sound rules of interpretation. It is the reality signified that is to be believed, not the words alone, which are only the signs of it. If by 'plain words' you mean the literal face value of words that may be figurative or have multiple meanings, then nothing is more false than this principle; for how then would you avoid the absurd error of the Anthropomorphites, who assigned a physical body and human form to God?

Second, the second premise we flatly deny in part — that Christ is said to give Himself as a ransom for every person — since this is neither often, nor even once, nor plainly, nor even obscurely affirmed in Scripture. As for the expression 'tasting death for everyone' (Hebrews 2:9), we grant those words are found there; but we deny that 'every man' always necessarily means all and every person in the world. 'Admonishing every man and teaching every man' (Colossians 1:28): 'every man' there does not mean every person in the world, nor can we believe that Paul personally warned and taught every single individual — which is both false and impossible. So 'every man' in Scripture is not universally collective of all of every kind, but is either distributive — meaning some of all kinds — or collective with a restriction to all of some particular group.

Third, that 'everyone' in Hebrews 2:9 is clearly restricted to all the members of Christ and the children He brings to glory, we have already shown. So that passage is in no way useful for supporting the second premise, which we deny in the sense intended.

To the conclusion of the syllogism, the author adds further proof — apparently aware that it has little force from the premises. Such logic is fitting to support such theology.

Argument 2: Those for whom Jesus Christ and His apostles plainly affirm without any exception or qualification that Christ came to save, died, gave Himself as a ransom, and is a propitiation for sin — He certainly did come to save them, give Himself as a ransom for them, and is the propitiation for their sins.

But Jesus Christ and His apostles have plainly affirmed that Christ came to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), the world (John 3:17), that He died for the unjust (1 Peter 3:18), the ungodly (Romans 5:6), for everyone (Hebrews 2:9), gave Himself as a ransom for all people (1 Timothy 2:6), and is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2) — and every one of these statements without any exception or qualification.

Therefore Jesus Christ came to save, died, and gave Himself as a ransom for all people, and is the propitiation for their sins (John 1:29).

Regarding the first premise of this argument, I wish only to note that we do not claim Scripture ever places an explicit exception or qualification on those for whom Christ is said to die — as though in one place it says He died for all and in another it makes some exception to that. We only say that one Scripture passage interprets another and clarifies what in one place was ambiguous or unclear. When Scripture says Christ died or gave Himself as a ransom for all, we believe it; and when another passage declares that 'all' to mean His church, His elect, His sheep, all believers, some of all kinds from every people and nation and language under heaven — this is not placing an exception or qualification on what was said before, but only declaring that the 'all' for whom He gave Himself as a ransom was His whole church, all His elect, all His sheep, some of all kinds.

The second premise affirms that Christ and His apostles say He died to save sinners, the unjust, the ungodly, the world, all — and therefore the conclusion should simply be: Christ died for sinners, for the unjust, for the ungodly, for the world, and so on. The whole force of this argument lies in converting indefinite statements into universal ones: concluding that because Christ died for sinners, therefore He died for all sinners. If you extend the words in the conclusion no further than their intended meaning in the Scripture passages cited in the premise, we may safely grant the whole: namely, that Christ died for sinners and for the world — for sinful people in their various generations living in it. But if you intend a universality in the conclusion that includes every individual without exception, then the syllogism is fallacious and false.

Fourth, regarding the particular passages cited — 1 Timothy 1:15, 1 Peter 3:18, Romans 5:6, John 3:17, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 2:2 — these have already been considered. Romans 3:10, 19, 23; Ephesians 2:1-3; Titus 3:3; John 3:4 — these prove that all are sinners and children of wrath; but of Christ dying for all sinners, or for all those children of wrath, there is not the slightest suggestion. This should be sufficient as an answer to the first two arguments.

Argument 3: What Scripture sets forth as one end of Christ's death, and one basis and reason for God's exalting Christ to be the Lord and Judge of all, is certainly to be believed.

But Scripture sets forth as one end of Christ's death and resurrection that He might be Lord of all (Romans 14:9; 2 Corinthians 5:14-15), and for that reason God has exalted Him to be the Lord and Judge of all people (Romans 14:9, 11-12; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Philippians 2:7, 11; Acts 17:31; Romans 2:16). Therefore that Christ so died and rose again for all is a truth to be believed (1 Timothy 2:6-7).

The clumsy framing of this argument, the awkward expressions, and the errors along the way are the fault of the author, not the cause he represents, so I will not dwell on them. His interpretation of 'for this cause God exalted Christ' as referring only to His death and resurrection — when His resurrection, in which He was declared to be the Son of God with power (Romans 1:4), was itself a glorious part of His exaltation — illustrates the weakness that pervades this treatment. May God grant them understanding and repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth.

Second, regarding this entire argument as presented, I have only one request for Master More: if the difficulties of our times call him to write again, he should stop expressing his views through syllogisms. In the conclusion he asserts and infers — and then reinforces with a new proof text — something that was never suggested in either premise; the premises speak of Christ's exaltation as Judge of all (which concerns His own glory), while the conclusion speaks of His dying for all (which necessarily aims at their benefit). What a noble ambition — to drive out all human learning and replace it with such reasoning as this.

Third, the force and substance of the argument is this: Christ died and rose again so that He might be Lord and Judge of all; therefore Christ died for all. Now ask what T.M. means by 'dying for all,' and his whole treatise answers: it means paying a ransom for them all so that they might be saved. How this conclusion can be extracted from Christ's dominion over all and His authority to judge all — an authority that extends even to the angels, for whom He certainly did not die — I honestly cannot grasp.

Argument 6 amounts to the claim that universal redemption can be proved from Scripture — which is the very thing in question, making it no real argument at all. As for the second premise — that Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all and tasted death for all — these are indeed the words of Scripture and no one has ever denied them. But making 'all' mean every individual person in both passages cited is your addition, not Scripture's assertion. If you intend to prove that 'all' means every person of every age and kind — both elect and reprobate — and not all His children, all His elect, all His sheep, all the children given to Him by God, and some from every nation, language, and people — then I am glad to examine together the meaning of that word and the mind of God in it.

Proof 1: God so loved the world that He gave His Son to be the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14), and sends His servant to testify of His Son so that all people through Him might believe (John 1:4, 7), that whoever believes in Him might have everlasting life (John 3:16-17), and He is willing that all should come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) and be saved (1 Timothy 1:15).

The one essential thing to be proved is that the indefinite statements in Scripture about Christ's death should be understood universally — that the terms 'all' and 'world' mean every individual person in the world. But this proof offers nothing toward that end. It merely recites a few ambiguous passages and draws a false conclusion from them.

No thoughtful person familiar with this controversy will expect me to spend many words on such weak arguments, empty repetitions, confused expressions, and illogical conclusions as this supposed new argument — which is essentially the same as the first two and nearly all that follow. My answer is fourfold. First, whatever Scripture presents as a truth to be believed is certainly true and to be embraced. Second, Scripture presents the death of Christ, to all who hear the Gospel, as an all-sufficient means of bringing sinners to God — so that whoever believes and comes to Him will certainly be saved. Third, what can be concluded from this except that Christ's death is of such infinite value that it is able to save everyone to whom it is made known, if they obtain a share in it through true faith? Fourth, the conclusion should at least express the full and entire claim contained in the premise — namely, that Christ is presented as Savior of the world in such a way that whoever among them believes will be saved — which we fully grant, since this says nothing at all about the universality of redemption, but only about the fullness and sufficiency of His satisfaction.

Argument 5: What God will one day cause every person to confess to His glory is certainly a truth, for God will own no lie for His glory.

But God will one day cause every person to confess Jesus — by virtue of His death and the ransom He gave — to be Lord, to the glory of God (Philippians 2:7-11; Isaiah 45:22-23; Romans 14:9, 12; Psalm 86:9).

Therefore it is certainly a truth that Jesus Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all people and thereby holds the right of lordship over them; and if any refuse to believe and submit to His rule, He remains faithful and cannot deny Himself, but will one day bring them before Him and cause them to confess Him as Lord to the glory of God — when those who denied Him in the days of His patience will themselves be denied by Him (2 Timothy 2:12-14; Matthew 10:32-33; 2 Corinthians 5:10).

The conclusion of this argument should read — and only this: 'Therefore, that Jesus Christ is Lord and is to be confessed to the glory of God is certainly a truth.' Everything inserted about His giving Himself as a ransom for all, and about the conviction and condemnation of unbelievers, is entirely foreign to the point at hand. We do not attribute a fruitless, ineffectual redemption to Jesus Christ; we do not deny that He will also judge the reprobate — all who ignore, deny, and disobey the truth of His Gospel — and that all will be made to confess He is Lord of all on the last day. Second, regarding the phrase 'by virtue of His death and ransom given': we deny that Scripture anywhere teaches that the ransom Christ paid in His death was the cause of His exaltation to be Lord of all. Scripture presents His obedience to His Father in His death — not His satisfaction for our sins — as the basis of that exaltation (Philippians 2:7-11).

Argument 6: Whatever can be proved from Scripture — whether by plain statements or necessary logical conclusions, without twisting, quarreling over, adding to, removing from, or altering Scripture's words — is a truth to be believed.

But that Jesus Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all people, and by the grace of God tasted death for every person, can be proved from Scripture by both plain statements and necessary conclusions, without altering any words, as already shown in chapters 7-13 — which will now be arranged into several proofs. Therefore it is a truth to be believed that Jesus Christ gave Himself for all people and by the grace of God tasted death for every person.

The point of this argument is simply that universal redemption can be proved from Scripture — but since that is the very thing in dispute, there is no reason it should serve as an argument in its own right; it is just filling space. In answer: first, the first premise means this — what Scripture affirms, or what may be rightly deduced from it, is certainly to be believed. This is granted by everyone and is the only foundation of the very article of faith you are trying to oppose. Second, to the second premise: that Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all and tasted death for all is the very language of Scripture and has never been denied. Making 'all' mean every individual person in both passages is your addition, not Scripture's claim. If you intend to prove that 'all' means every person — elect and reprobate alike — and not all His elect, all His sheep, and some from every nation and language only, then with the Lord's help I am glad to examine with you the meaning of the word and the mind of God in it. The claim to be proved is that Jesus Christ, according to His Father's counsel and will, and in His own mind and intention, paid a ransom in His death for every individual person — elect and reprobate, saved and lost alike — and not only for His elect or the church chosen before the foundation of the world. Various scripture passages have been offered to confirm this, and we will consider them in order.

Proof 1 of Argument 6.

God so loved the world that He gave His Son to be the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14), and sent His servant to testify of His Son so that all people through Him might believe (John 1:4, 7), that whoever believes in Him might have everlasting life (John 3:16-17), and He wills that all should come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) and be saved (1 Timothy 1:15), and He will not withhold sufficient help from those who, as light comes, allow themselves to be moved and receive it (Proverbs 1:23; 8:4-5) — is this not plain in Scripture?

Answer.

The one essential — indeed the only — thing to be proved is that the indefinite statements in Scripture about Christ's death are to be understood universally: that the terms 'all' and 'world,' when they define the objects of Christ's death, signify every individual person in the world. Unless this is demonstrated, all other effort is completely useless and fruitless. Yet toward this, the proof offered is nothing more than a few ambiguous passages simply cited, with a false conclusion drawn from them that the texts themselves do not support.

Regarding 1 John 4:14: God's sending His Son to be the Savior of the world simply means He is the Savior of people living in the world — which His elect are. As for John 1:4, 7 — that all people through Him might believe — verse 7 refers to John the Baptist, not Christ: he was sent as a witness so that all through him might believe. By 'all' there, the text means only some of all kinds to whom his word came, so the necessary sense of 'all' in this passage actually undermines the premise entirely. As for John 3:16-17 — that God sent His Son so that whoever believes might have eternal life — this is not disputed among Christians as to its meaning. Regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 — God's willing that all should be saved — I ask: what act of God does this willing consist in? If it is God's eternal decree that all should be saved, why is it not accomplished, since who has resisted His will? Grant that salvation is found only in Jesus Christ as Redeemer, and show me one instance in which God has declared to all people of all times and places His willingness for their salvation — and I will never raise this matter with you again. By 'all people' we understand some of all kinds throughout the world. What closes this proof — that God will not withhold sufficient help from those who allow themselves to be moved — is the whole Pelagian poison of free will and Arminian sufficient grace, neither of which finds the slightest support in the passages cited.

The substance of the whole claim is that a universal sufficiency of grace is given to all — even grace enabling obedience — a position so contradicted by countless Scripture passages, so derogatory to God's free grace, so destructive of its efficacy, and so plainly an enthronement of the old idol free will in the place of God, that it stands among the worst errors a declining Christianity has produced. Far from being plain and clear in Scripture, it stands in direct contradiction to the entire administration of the new covenant.

Proof 2.

The second proof: Jesus Christ the Son of God came into the world to save the world (John 12:47), to save sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), to take away our sins and destroy the works of the devil (1 John 3:5, 8), to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29), and therefore died for all (2 Corinthians 5:14-15) and gave Himself as a ransom for all (1 Timothy 2:6), to save what was lost (Matthew 18:11) — so His propitiation was for the world (2 Corinthians 5:19), indeed the whole world (1 John 2:2) — all of which, it is claimed, is fully and plainly in Scripture.

Answer.

The passages in this proof that mention 'all' or 'world' — John 12:47, John 1:29, 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, 1 Timothy 2:6, 2 Corinthians 5:19, 1 John 2:2 — have already all been addressed, and I have no wish to burden the reader with repetition. Review those discussions, and I have no doubt you will find that far from supporting what is being argued, they actually undermine it. As for the remaining passages — 1 Timothy 1:15, Matthew 18:11, 1 John 3:5, 8 — I cannot see how anything in them supports the universality of redemption, and what they actually argue against it has already been explained.

Proof 3.

The third proof: God in Christ gives, through some appointed means or another, some witness to all people of His mercy and goodness procured by Christ (Psalm 19:6; Romans 10:8; Acts 14:17), and through this sends at some point some stirrings of His Spirit to move and knock at people's hearts, inviting them to repentance and seeking God, so that they may lay hold on the grace and salvation offered — and this not in pretense but in genuine goodwill, ready to bestow it on all who receive it; and all of this is fully attested in Scripture (Genesis 6:3; Isaiah 45:22; Acts 17:30-31; John 1:9).

Answer.

If universal redemption needs proofs like these, it is in great need and has little hope of support. Universal calling is here asserted to prop up universal redemption — the two legs of the idol of free will set up for people to worship, each keeping the other upright when it staggers. First, it is true that God has at all times since creation called people to knowledge of Himself as the great Creator through the visible creation (Romans 1:19-20; Psalm 19:1-2; Acts 14:17). Second, after Christ's death, God called home through Gospel preaching the children of God scattered throughout the world (Mark 16:15; Romans 10:18; Acts 17:30-31). But third — that God should at all times, in every place and every age, grant means of grace or issue a call to Christ as Redeemer, along with stirrings and movements of His Spirit for people to respond to — this is so baseless and contrary to God's distinguishing mercy, and so plainly contradicted by Scripture, that I am astonished anyone would assert it. Let the reader consult Psalm 147:19-20, Matthew 11:25, Matthew 22:14, Acts 14:16, Acts 16:7, and Romans 10:14-15.

Proof 4.

The fourth proof: the Holy Spirit who comes from the Father and the Son will convict the world of sin — because people do not believe in Christ, and their unbelief is their sin. But how could it be their sin not to believe in Christ, and how could they stand condemned for that unbelief, if the atonement Christ made had nothing in it for them, if God's offer of mercy to them were not genuine, and if the Spirit's movements were not sufficient to have brought them to believe at some point? And yet all this is evident in Scripture (John 3:18-19; 8:24; 12:48; 15:22, 24; 16:8-11).

Answer.

This proof aims to show that people will be condemned for their unbelief — for not believing in Christ — which, the author claims, cannot be just unless three things are granted: first, that the atonement Christ made has something in it for them; second, that God's offer of mercy to them is genuine; third, that the Spirit grants them sufficient will and power at some point to believe. To the first: if 'enough in the atonement for them' means the atonement contains sufficient merit for them, we do not deny it — not because the atonement lacks sufficiency, but because it was not made for them. If you mean there is sufficiency in Christ's merit to save them should they believe, we grant that, and affirm this sufficiency is the main basis for presenting it to all who hear the Gospel. To the second: there is an eternal truth in God's offer of mercy — namely, that God will certainly give life and salvation to all who believe. These offers declare our duty and the connection between faith and life; they say nothing at all about God's intention toward the particular soul receiving the offer. To the third: I say, first, you are putting the cart before the horse by placing will before power. Second, I deny that any internal assistance is needed to make a person without excuse for not believing, as long as the object of faith has been set before him. Third, please explain how a person can be given a will to believe and yet still not believe. The passage in John 16:7-11 about the Spirit convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment primarily refers to the abundant outpouring of the Spirit on the apostles at Pentecost after Christ's ascension — which accomplished exactly this in Peter's sermon in Acts 3, when enemies and haters of Christ cried out, 'Men and brothers, what must we do to be saved?' What this has to do with universal redemption, let those who think they understand it keep to themselves — I am confident they will never be able to explain it to others.

Proof 5.

Proof 5 asserts that God has testified by His Word and oath that Christ would accomplish a redemption for all people, that God wills all to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4; John 3:17), and that He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked but rather wills that they turn and live (Ezekiel 18:23, 32; 33:11). And would anyone dare say that the God of truth says and swears something He does not inwardly and genuinely mean?

Answer.

First, the claim that God testified by word and oath that Christ saves only 'so far' is a bold falsehood — God revealed that Christ saves to the uttermost all who come to Him (Hebrews 7:25), not merely in some partial degree. Second, that Christ would bring all people to the knowledge of the truth is another bold distortion of Scripture. Third, John 3:17 speaks of being fully saved from sins (Matthew 1:21) and to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25) — which confirms that only the world of God's elect is intended. In 1 Timothy 2:4 there is something about God's will to save all kinds of people, but nothing that supports the strong claim being made here. Fourth, Ezekiel 18:23, 32 might give some color to a general call to repentance, but gives no support to universal redemption, since the passage contains no mention of Christ or His death. The words are addressed to the house of Israel alone (verse 25), not to all humanity. 'God wills not the death of a sinner' means either that God has decreed they shall not die — but then why do sinners die, since His counsel is immutable? — or that He commands those He calls to do what leads to life. The entire passage in Ezekiel concerns God's temporal judgment on Israel for their sins; it has nothing to do with a universal design in the death of Christ.

Proof 6.

The very words and phrases the Holy Spirit uses in Scripture about the death of Christ — all nations (Matthew 28:19-20), the ends of the earth (Isaiah 45:22; 49:6), every creature (Mark 16:15), all (2 Corinthians 5:14-15; 1 Timothy 2:6), every person (Hebrews 2:9), the world (John 3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 5:19), the whole world (1 John 2:2), what was lost (Luke 19:10), sinners (Matthew 9:13), the unjust (1 Peter 3:18), the ungodly (Romans 5:6) — imply no less than all people without exception. And since whoever repents and believes in Christ will receive His grace (John 3:16, 18; Acts 10:43), would it not be arrogant and mistaken to invent interpretations that restrict what Scripture presents so openly for all people?

Answer.

This argument from words and phrases is essentially the same argument repeated throughout the whole book — it does nothing more than restate the very point under debate, namely whether 'all' and 'the world' are to be taken universally, and merely asserts that they are without proving it. Second, the passages that speak of Christ dying for sinners, the ungodly, and what was lost have already been shown to give no real support to universal redemption. Third, all the passages where 'all,' 'every person,' 'the world,' and 'the whole world' appear have been examined at length. Fourth, 'all nations' and 'every creature' refer to those to whom the Gospel is to be preached without national restriction — they do not encompass every individual at all times, and the command to preach the Gospel to all does not in the least prove that Christ intended to redeem all. Fifth, 'the ends of the earth' in Isaiah 45:22 refers to those who look to God and are saved; and Christ being given as salvation to the ends of the earth (Isaiah 49:6) means gathering the preserved remnant of His elect — which is the correct interpretation of 'all' and 'the world' wherever those terms appear.

Proof 7.

The seventh proof argues that Scripture describes certain high and unique privileges of the Spirit belonging only to the saints and God's chosen, yet when these privileges are mentioned alongside the ransom and propitiation, they are not expressed in exclusive terms but with language that leaves room to apply the ransom to all people. Scripture says Christ died 'for His sheep' and 'for many,' but nowhere says 'only for His sheep' or 'only for many' — which the author takes as strong proof that the ransom is for all.

Answer.

The claim that where these unique privileges are mentioned alongside the ransom there is room to extend the ransom to all is asserted but never proved. First, it is certain that all particular saving privileges belong only to God's elect, purchased for them alone by the blood of Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:3-4); Christ's death for them is itself one of those privileges — He redeemed His church with His own blood (Acts 20:28) and gave Himself for it (Ephesians 5:25-26). Second, that 'room' is merely asserted, not demonstrated. Third, whether 'many,' 'sheep,' or 'all' is used, the language about the ransom is handled identically throughout Scripture. Fourth, in several passages the ransom and the unique privileges are so inseparably joined that it is impossible to apply the privileges to some while extending the ransom to all — Revelation 5:9-10 assigns the redemption by blood precisely to those crowned individuals distinguished from the rest of the nations, from among whom they were taken. Fifth, enough has already been said about the sheep passages.

Proof 8.

The eighth proof asserts that the restoration Christ accomplished in His own body for humanity is as broad and complete for all people, and as powerful in its effect, as Adam's fall was for all people — Christ as the second Adam therefore corresponding to the first Adam in universal scope (Romans 3:22-24; 5:12, 14, 18; 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, 45-47).

Answer.

First, it is true that Christ and Adam are compared in Romans 5:12, 18, but the comparison concerns the intensity of efficacy, not the extent of its objects — the apostle asserts that Christ's righteousness is as powerful to justify as Adam's transgression was to condemn, with Adam's sin passing to all his natural descendants and Christ's righteousness to all His spiritual descendants, the children given to Him by the Father. Second, 1 Corinthians 15:22-23 speaks of the resurrection to glory through Christ's resurrection — verse 23 restricts that 'all' to all who are Christ's; others will also rise, but not to a resurrection of glory. Third, the comparison in verse 45 is between the kinds of life each communicated to those united to them: Adam a living soul giving natural life, Christ a life-giving Spirit giving grace to His own. Fourth, Romans 3:23 — 'all have sinned' — was stated to show that salvation comes only through Christ; when Paul specifies to whom Christ's righteousness extends, he says plainly: 'to all and upon all those who believe' (verse 22), whether Jew or Gentile.

Proof 9.

The Lord Jesus Christ sent and commanded His servants to preach the Gospel to all nations and to every creature, and to tell them that whoever believes and is baptized will be saved (Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16), and His servants have so preached to all (2 Corinthians 5:19; Romans 10:13, 18). And the Lord Jesus Christ will make it clear one day that He did not send His servants on a false errand, did not put a lie in their mouths, and did not have them pretend to offer to all what they knew belonged only to a few — but to speak truth (Isaiah 44:26; 61:8; 1 Timothy 1:12).

Answer.

The force of this ninth proof is not easy to see. First, it is true that Christ commanded His apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations and every creature — calling all people without distinction of person or nation to repent and believe, except where the Spirit withheld them (Acts 16:6-7). Second, His servants obeyed, calling people everywhere to be reconciled to God without discrimination (2 Corinthians 5:19-20; Romans 10:18). Third, it is absolutely certain that Christ did not send His servants with a lie to offer what belonged only to some. But what any of this proves for universal redemption is impossible to see. The Gospel has never been preached to every individual person — and what must be proved is that Christ died for all people, including those who never hear the Gospel. What do Gospel preachers offer? Life and salvation through Christ on the condition of faith and repentance — and the truth of that offer rests on this: that everyone who believes will be saved, which stands firm as long as Christ is all-sufficient to save all who come to Him. God has entrusted ministers with His commands and promises, not His secret purposes and counsels — and it is no lie to tell people 'he who believes shall be saved,' even if Christ did not die for some of them.

Proof 10.

The tenth proof: the Lord wills believers to pray even for the unjust and their persecutors (Matthew 5:44, 48; Luke 6:28), yes even for all people, yes even for kings and all who are in authority (1 Timothy 2:1, 4), on this ground: it is good in the sight of God, who wills all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Surely this means a door of life has been opened for all (2 Timothy 1:10).

Answer.

The force of this proof rests on several unfounded assumptions. First, it assumes that indefinite statements are equivalent to universal ones — which is false (Romans 4:5). Second, it assumes that 'all' in 1 Timothy 2:1 does not mean all kinds of people, when the apostle's enumeration of various categories plainly shows a distributive meaning. Third, it assumes we are obligated to pray for every individual person that they may be saved — for which there is no warrant, rule, command, or example in Scripture. This is contrary to the apostle's direction (1 John 5:16), our Savior's example (John 17:9), and the revealed counsel and purpose of God (Romans 9:11-12, 15; 11:7). Fourth, it assumes the only thing we should pray for people is that they be saved through Christ — which is obviously false (Jeremiah 29:7). Fifth, it assumes our basis for praying for anyone is assurance that Christ died for them in particular — which is not the case (Acts 8:22, 24). Inferring God's secret purpose from our duty is invalid reasoning, though inferring our duty from His command is entirely sound.

Proof 11.

The eleventh proof states that the Lord has given His Word and promise to be with His servants as they preach the Gospel to all, and with His people as they pray for all, so that both may proceed with confidence (Matthew 28:20; 1 Timothy 2:3, 8; Luke 10:6; Isaiah 54:17).

Answer.

That God will be with His people whether in preaching or praying according to His will and their duty is as clear as it is obvious that this proves nothing for universal redemption.

Proof 12.

The Lord has already fulfilled His word to His servants and people, showing mercy to the very end — mercy to people of all sorts and all kinds of sinners — so that none might exclude themselves, but all might be encouraged to repent, believe, and hope (Acts 2; 3; 8; 9; 10; 11; 16; 19; 28; 1 Corinthians 6:10-11; 1 Timothy 1:13-17).

Answer.

Had the author told us that God had already fulfilled His word by saving every individual person and proved it clearly, he would have undeniably confirmed his main position. But by affirming only that God has shown mercy to some of all sorts and all kinds of sinners — so that others of the same kind might be encouraged to believe — he has actually undermined his own case and established that of his opponents: showing that in practice, God declares Himself on their side, saving in the blood of Jesus only some of all kinds, not every individual.

Proof 13.

The thirteenth proof argues that the blessing of life has flowed through the doctrine of God's love for humanity, and that in the gracious revelation of the ransom given and the atonement made by Christ for all people, God has first and above all moved His chosen ones to believe and turn to God (Acts 13:48; Titus 2:11, 13; 3:4-5).

Answer.

First, the freedom of God's grace and the greatness of His eternal love toward humanity — expressed in the sending of His Son to die for them and reclaim them from sin and Satan — is a most powerful motive for conversion, and we gladly acknowledge this. But that this motive has ever been effective by extending that love to all, or that its effectiveness depends on that broader application, we utterly deny. First, that claim is false and a corruption of God's Word, and no good conclusion can follow from a false premise. Second, this idea undermines the very power of this heavenly motive by turning the intense and incomparable love of God toward His elect into a common desire and a love that falls short — which is contrary to His nature. Third, the passages cited contain nothing of this common love for all: the grace in Titus 2:11-13 is the grace that certainly brings salvation — not a common goodwill — and came to redeem a people of His own. Likewise the love and kindness in Titus 3:4-5 is that by which we receive the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit — a particular, not a common, love. Fourth, Acts 13:47 speaks only of the extension of God's mercy through the Gospel to the Gentiles as well as the Jews — which is far from proving universal grace.

Proof 14.

The fourteenth proof urges that those who, when the Gospel and its light come to them, refuse to believe and are drawn away by other things, are said to love darkness rather than light (John 3:19), to follow empty idols and forfeit their own mercies (Jonah 2:8), to harden their own hearts (Romans 2:5), to lose their souls (Matthew 16:26), and to destroy themselves (Hosea 13:9). And since they had already fallen through Adam into darkness, hardness, and spiritual death, how could these things be said of them if Christ had obtained no life for them, made no atonement, brought about no restoration, and provided no means by which they could be saved?

Answer.

The sum of this argument is: those who do not believe when the Gospel is preached are the cause of their own ruin; therefore Jesus Christ died for every person in the world. Though it might seem wasted effort to answer such a non sequitur, a few observations are necessary so that weaker readers are not left with lingering doubts. First, not all people have the Gospel preached to them — from the beginning of the world the great majority of humanity has been passed over in the distribution of the means of grace (Romans 2; Acts 17). All such people must be excluded from this conclusion, which makes it entirely useless to the case at hand, since the universality of redemption collapses the moment even one soul is not included in the payment of the ransom. Second, what destroys people is not their failure to believe that Christ died for every individual soul — which Scripture nowhere requires as an article of faith — but their failure to trust in the all-sufficiency of Christ's suffering for sinners, and their rejection of the mercy obtained through it on the terms the Gospel sets out. Those terms do not address God's purpose regarding for whom Christ died, but the sufficiency and efficacy of His death for all who receive Him. Third, the other passages cited — Jonah 2:8, Romans 2:5, Matthew 16:26, Hosea 13:9 — give no support to the argument. Jonah 2:8 concerns those who abandon the true God for idols and thereby forfeit their temporal and spiritual mercies. Romans 2:5 speaks of Gentiles who had the created order to instruct them and God's patience waiting on them, yet hardened themselves further. Fourth, the conclusion of this proof seems to reveal a deeper purpose — that all people are in a restored condition through Christ: not merely that a door of mercy is open to all, but that all are actually brought back into grace and favor, so that if they do not fall away they will certainly be saved. The argument for this is that since people fell in Adam into darkness and hardness, they could not be said to love darkness and harden themselves unless they had first been restored and enlightened by Christ. If this is the author's meaning — as it appears to be — several things must be said. First, regarding the argument itself: this is like saying that because original sin makes people guilty of death, they cannot by actual sins make their condemnation worse; or that because people are naturally blind they cannot be said to undervalue light. It is precisely because they are blind that they undervalue it — and people who have the time, opportunity, and means to save their souls can rightly be said to lose them by their own fault. Second, regarding the claim itself — that all people are actually restored by Christ into covenant — there is nothing in Scripture that gives this gross error the slightest support. It contradicts many passages affirming that we are dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1), that unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God (John 3:3), and that until one comes by faith to Christ the wrath of God remains on him (John 3:36), along with countless other passages demonstrating the universal alienation of all people from God until actual peace and reconciliation is made through Christ. It contradicts the very nature of the new covenant of grace, which flows from God's free mercy to His elect, is made with His own people in distinction from the world, and effectively works every promised good in all those to whom it belongs — which is certainly not all people. It contradicts the eternal purpose of God in election and reprobation, reprobation being a decision to leave people in their fallen state with no reparation through Christ. This position also carries many absurd consequences. First, all infants who die before committing any actual sin must necessarily be saved, placing the infants of Turks, Pagans, and persecutors in a far happier condition than the apostles of Christ who died in maturity — yet Christ said that without being born again no one can see the kingdom of God (John 3:3), Paul says the children of unbelievers are unclean (1 Corinthians 7:14), and nothing unclean shall enter the new Jerusalem (Revelation 21:27). Second, nothing more is required of anyone to be saved than simply remaining in the condition in which he was born — when the entire Word of God declares that all who remain in that state will certainly perish eternally. Third, every person in the whole world who perishes must have fallen away from the grace of the new covenant — yet the covenant's promises declare there will never be a total falling away of those who are in covenant. Fourth, no one can come to Christ except those who have first personally fallen away from Him, since all others are already abiding in Him. Countless other absurdities follow inevitably from this false and heretical assertion, which is completely destructive to the free grace of God.

Proof 15.

The fifteenth proof urges God's earnest pleadings, appeals, and protests to those many who ultimately perished (Romans 11:27; Isaiah 10:22) — such as: 'Oh that there were such a heart in them to fear Me, that it might go well with them' (Deuteronomy 5:29); 'What more could have been done for My vineyard?' (Isaiah 5:4-5); 'What injustice did your fathers find in Me?' (Jeremiah 2:5); 'My people, what have I done to you?' (Micah 6:3); 'How often I wanted to gather your children together, and you were unwilling' (Matthew 23:37); 'Because I called and you refused' (Proverbs 1:24-25, 32) — arguing that since God pleads in this way with all, a ransom must have been given for them and genuine mercy shown to them.

Answer.

First, in all these pleadings there is no mention of any ransom given or atonement made for those who perish — they all concern temporal mercies and outward means of grace. Second, all the passages cited (except Romans 1:28 and 2:5, which plainly ground the inexcusability of sin on knowledge available through creation and providence) are addressed only to those who enjoyed the means of grace — a very small portion of all humanity, so nothing can be concluded from them about God's mind toward all others (Psalm 147:19-20). Third, everyone who enjoys the means of grace has received so many mercies from God that He may justly plead with them about their ingratitude. Fourth, everything God pleads with people about lacking, He could — if He chose — effectively work in human hearts by His exceeding power. So these pleadings cannot be declarations of His purpose. Fifth, desires and wishes should not properly be ascribed to God — these expressions are to be understood as language adapted to human understanding. Sixth, all these passages are nothing more than emphatic declarations of our duty, strong convictions of the disobedient, and a vindication of the excellence of God's ways. The conclusion 'therefore Christ died for all people' does not follow.

Proof 16.

The sixteenth proof urges the way Scripture describes the sin of those who despise and refuse grace — that they turn the grace of God into an excuse for immorality (Jude 4), trample underfoot the Son of God, treat as common the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and insult the Spirit of grace (Hebrews 10:29), deny the Lord who bought them (2 Peter 2:1), and perish — those for whom Christ died (1 Corinthians 8:11) — being trees twice dead, uprooted (Jude 12-13), bringing on themselves swift destruction (2 Peter 2:1). The argument is: how could all this be said of them if God had in no way given His Son for them, if Christ had shed no blood to obtain their remission, if He had not purchased them?

Answer.

First, the three scripture passages most pressed in this case — Hebrews 10:29, 2 Peter 2:1, and 1 Corinthians 8:11 — have already been examined at length, where it was shown they in no way support what they are forcibly made to prove. Second, as for the passages from Jude — verses 4, 12, and 13 — it is not clear how they bear on the matter at hand. Those said in verse 4 to 'turn the grace of God into an excuse for immorality' are abusing the doctrine of the Gospel to encourage themselves in sin — from which it is a strange inference to conclude that Christ died for all people, especially since the apostle indicates that Christ did not die for these abusers of His grace, declaring that they were marked out for condemnation long ago.

Proof 17.

The seventeenth proof argues that Jesus Christ by virtue of His death will be the Judge of all, and that by the Gospel — in which they could have been saved — He will judge them to a second death. How can this be if He never died the first death for them, and if the Gospel preached to them contained no truth? (Romans 14:9-12; Philippians 2:7-11; Romans 2:16; John 12:47-48, 50)

Answer.

First, that Jesus Christ will be Judge of all and that all judgment has been given to Him is granted; but it does not follow that He died for all — otherwise one would also have to say He died for the devils, since they too will be judged by Him. Second, that all people will be judged by the Gospel — including those who never heard a word of it — is directly contrary to Scripture: 'as many as have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and as many as have sinned under the law will be judged by the law' (Romans 2:12). Every person will be judged according to the light and standard they had or could have had, not according to what was completely beyond their reach. Third, the claim that Christ died only 'the first death' is neither a scriptural expression nor deducible from Scripture. Fourth, the suggestion that there is no truth in the Gospel preached unless Christ died for all is actually one of the most self-defeating assertions imaginable. The passages cited speak of Christ as Lord, exalted above all, and Judge of all — but how they can be twisted to support universal atonement is not apparent.

Proof 18.

The eighteenth proof urges that believers are exhorted to contend for the faith of this common salvation once delivered to the saints (Jude 3-5), which some who have heard it oppose and others twist into an excuse for sin; and that by ignoring and not walking in it, people deprive themselves of the salvation already accomplished by Christ and cut themselves off from the salvation to come.

And each of these proofs being plain and scriptural — and each having force individually, how much more together — they continue to support the sense that 1 Timothy 2:6 and Hebrews 2:9 convey, and the truth of the original proposition.

Answer.

All that can be found here is that the salvation purchased by Christ is called 'common salvation.' If the author concludes from this that it is common to all people, he might as well conclude that faith belongs to all people, since it is called 'the common faith' (Titus 1:4) — though also 'the faith of God's elect' (verse 1). There is a community of believers, and the common salvation is the salvation by which they are all saved — having nothing to do with the strange kind of 'common salvation' maintained here, the kind by which no one is actually saved. The rest of this proof is filled with words suited to the author's convictions but largely contrary to God's Word and derogatory to the merits of Christ, making the salvation He purchased ineffective in itself and dependent on sinful and corrupted people either to make it effective or to reject it.

These are the proofs this author calls plain and scriptural — they amount to a summary of nearly everything he has said throughout his whole book, with little of weight left out. Whether the thing meant to be proved — that Christ paid a ransom for every individual person — is plainly and clearly confirmed from Scripture, as the author would have us believe; or whether this whole collection of claims called arguments, reasons, and proofs is not in its manner of expression obscure, in its manner of reasoning childish, weak, and laughable, in its use and interpretation of Scripture perverse, forced, and in direct opposition to the revealed mind and will of God — this is left to the judgment of every Christian reader who examines them alongside the answers given here.