Christ to men. How is it consistent with the Divine wisdom for Christ to die, to render the salvation of all men possible, and yet leave many of them destitute of those means, without which it is not possible, according to the Scriptures, that they should be saved? "Where there is no vision, the people perish," Prov. xxix. 18. "They are lost to whom the Gospel is hid," 2 Cor. iv. 3. "Such as have not the Son have not life," 1 John v. 12. "Without faith it is impossible to please God," Heb. xi. 6. "He that believeth not shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth upon him," John iii. 36. "And how shall men believe in him of whom they have not heard?" Rom. x. 14. So then, without faith, there is no salvation; without hearing of Christ, there can be no faith in him, or salvation by him; and by withholding the revelation of Christ from vast numbers, God renders their salvation impossible, which it is said Christ, by his death, had rendered possible: And thus the purchase of the Son is made void, by the providence of the Father, according to the scheme of our opponents. But God forbid it should be so, in reality! For what kind of wisdom or prudence could there be, either in the Father, or the Son, for Christ to shed his precious blood, to redeem myriads, to whom, after all, they did not think fit to give any notice of it, or any means of enjoying the redemption obtained for them? Or, how is it consistent with the justice or goodness of God, for him to withhold the knowledge of the way of salvation from multitudes, for whom Christ purchased a possibility of salvation? Had not men better quit their notion of universal redemption, than be so injurious to the wisdom, justice, and goodness of God, as, according to their doctrine, they must unavoidably be? The difficulty is not removed by saying, that those who never enjoy the revelation of Christ, are shut out from it, by their negligence and disobedience, seeing "Christ is found of them who sought him not, and is made manifest to them that asked not after him; and all the day long stretches out his hand to a disobedi

ent and gainsaying people," Rom. x. 20, 21. There must then be some other reason of God's leaving so many destitute of the revelation of Christ. For this no good reason can be given, upon a supposition that Christ redeemed all men: But if it is allowed that he redeemed only a select number, good reasons may be assigned why the Gospel is sent to some places, and not to others; and why it continues longer in one place, than in another, because Christ has much people there, Acts xviii. 10. and in many places it never comes, because the elect, the redeemed, obtain, but the rest are blinded, Rom. x. 7.

Upon the whole, our position holds true, that the necessary means of salvation are afforded to all those for whom Christ died, to render their salvation possible; and hence the conclusion follows, that Christ did not die to render the salvation of all men possible, seeing all men have not the necessary means of salvation. 12. The intention and design of Christ's redemption, is agreeable to Scripture and reason, and stands clear of all absurdities and inconsistencies.

To deny this proposition, would be to cast the most injurious reflections on the Redeemer, and his work, directly contrary to God the Father; who, on the account of Christ's becoming obedient to the death of the cross, has highly exalted him, and given him a name above every name.

Christ's intention in giving himself, was, according to the Scriptures, to redeem men from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar people; and it appears to be reasonable, that his intention should be accomplished, and that he should not shed his precious blood in vain, or be disappointed of his end, with respect to the greatest part of those for whom he died. But thus it must be, if he died to render the salvation of men possible, on condition they believe in him, and yet leaves so great a part of them under an impossibility of performing that condition, or enjoying the salvation, by not revealing or making himself known to them, as was observed before.

The Scriptures no where speak of a conditional, uncertain redemption of men, depending on the will of the fallen creature, as to all its salutary effects. It is contrary to reason for Christ to leave salvation depending upon the will of man, which had ruined him in his best estate, and was not at all likely to save him in his worst. How could Christ expect that the intention of his death should be accomplished in such a way? Will the fallen creature take more care to secure the good effects of his death, than the Sufferer and Saviour himself did? How inconsistent and absurd must it be for Christ to exercise the greatest love towards, and inflict the greatest wrath upon, the same persons, at the same time? as it must be, if he, in infinite love, died to redeem all men; and yet multitudes in hell were suffering his vengeance, at the same time he loved them, and gave himself for them. Does it not sound very harsh and shocking to say, that the saved are no more beholden to the Redeemer, than the damned? And yet this is true, if Christ loved and died equally for all men. How contrary, both to Scripture and reason, is it to charge God with taking a double satisfaction for the same sins, one from Christ, and another from the damned themselves? Which yet is fact, if Christ died for all men, and satisfied the justice of God for all men. Could Christ, in infinite love, die for all men, without any fixed intention and resolution to save any one man? Could Christ come to do the will of God, and yet subject all to the will of men, and leave it to them whether the Father should have the pleasure, and Christ the satisfaction, in redemption, foretold and promised, Isa. liii. 10, 11.? whether the Father should enjoy one object of his love, or Christ the travail of his soul, in one single instance or not? And yet so it was, according to their scheme, who say, that Christ died to purchase salvation conditionally for all men, but absolutely and certainly for no man, leaving to men, either to make it effectual by believing, or of no effect by their unbelief. How shall men be convinced, that Christ crucified is the

wisdom of God to salvation, if not so much as one soul had its salvation certainly secured, by Christ's sufferings, and that too, when, as it is said, he died to save all men ?

How contrary this notion of redemption is to Christ's intention, to Scripture and reason, and with how many difficulties and inconsistencies it is attended, may, in part, appear by what goes before, wherein I have not, to my knowledge, strained or misre presented any thing. But on the other hand, if God loved, and Christ died for, a select number only, and effectually secured to them grace and glory; this is agreeable to Scripture and reason, advances the glory of the Divine perfections, and provides most for the comfort and happiness of man, as I hope to make appear, in answer to our opponents' allegations to the contrary, when I come to that part of my work.

Upon the whole, let the propositions which have been advanced, explained, and confirmed by Scripture, with the plain deductions from them, be seriously and impartially considered; and then let all judge whether Christ intended to redeem all men, or some only, when he gave himself for us, to redeem us from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

SERMON III.

TITUS ii. 14.

Jesus Christ gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

THE death of Christ being the fountain of our life, there is nothing more necessary, pleasant, or useful to the Christian, than a right apprehension and remembrance of it: And, therefore, there is no doctrine of

the Christian religion that has been more opposed and depraved than this; some denying that Christ, strictly speaking, died for any man, and others as confidently affirming, that he died for all men, with an intention to redeem and save all men; whereas my text represents him as dying for a peculiar people. Several arguments, establishing this truth, have been insisted on, in some former Discourses on this text; I now proceed to the second thing I proposed.

II. I shall answer the principal arguments, and vindicate the chief passages of Scripture, produced in opposition to the truth which I have been defending.

1. Our opponents endeavour to prove, from the gen. eral and universal Scripture terms, that Christ did not die to redeem a select number only, but all men. And here they produce many texts, wherein it is said, that Christ died for the world, the whole world, for all men, and every man, and the like: And it must be owned, that these words sound well on their side; and if they take them separately from the texts, and contexts, where they are used, and just in what sense they please, they may serve to make a flourish with, and may be a sufficient proof of the point, to such as look only to the surface, but not to the bottom of things, who more regard the sound, than the sense of the words, as used in the respective places: But such as understand an argument, must know, that no certain conclusion can be drawn from doubtful premises; nor can the general or universal terms prove universal redemption, till it is first proved that these terms are used in a universal sense, in the texts alleged: We deny that they are so used; and I hope to make it appear, that a restriction and limitation is annexed to them, in the texts, or contexts, where they are used, with ref erence to our redemption by Christ.

Before we examine particular passages, let it be observed, that they ought all to be taken in such a sense, as agrees with the express end and design of Christ's death, and never in a sense contradictory thereto.