to heaven: he means, I suppose, to his state of exaltation. But is not his prayer upon the cross, expressly called in prophecy, making INTERCESSION for the transgressors? Isa. liii. 12. But, farther, he calls for proof that the death and intercession of Christ are of equal extent (XIII. 99.) The intercession of the priests under the law, being on the behalf of the same persons on whose account they offered the oblation, was mentioned. Whether this be a sufficient ground to rest the argument upon, or not, one should think it has some weight in it; but of this Mr. T. takes no notice.

Finally; I argued, from Rev. v. 9. xiv. 3, 4. where Christians are said to be redeemed, or bought from among men, which should seem to imply, that all men are not redeemed, or bought. Mr. T. here goes about to refute some things upon which I built nothing. (XIII. 101, 102.) Whether the four living creatures, and the four-and-twenty elders, represent the church militant or the church triumphant, or whether the persons in question represent the whole church triumphant or only a part of it, are matters that signify but little, if any thing, to the point in hand. If the whole, or a part of the church triumphant, were bought, or redeemed by blood, from amongst men, that is sufficient. Mr. T. deals plentifully, E observe, in such language as, if I had used it, he would have held up in italics to great advantage; such as "I do not remember—I think—and I think." I do not mention this as improper language: I only mean to remind him, that he should not have been so severe upon me for using the same. As to what he has said upon this passage, I think, upon the whole, it is as forcible as any thing that can be said on his side the question; though it is certain, that the natural meaning of the word yogaonoav, they were BOUGHT, and its only meaning, that I recollect, in the New Testament, must be utterly cashiered; and, I apprehend, the natural meaning of the whole passage greatly forced, to admit of his interpretation. I am yours, &c.

P.S. I do not recollect that the whole world, or all, or all men, are ever said to be purchased, or bought, or redeemed, by the blood of Christ; or that we ever read of Christ's redeeming, buying, or purchasing, any but his church. Mr.

T. does not pretend, that all mankind are redeemed; but I think, if we take our notions from the New Testament, it is evident, that buying, or purchasing, when applied to what Christ has done for us, is as much confined to the church, as redemption. Αγοράζω and περιποιέω, which are used to express the ideas of buying, purchasing, or acquiring by price, are applied to the church of God only; as well as λurgóoμai, to redeem, Luke xxiv. 21. Tit. ii. 14. and aúrgov, a ransom, Matt. xx. 28. Mark x. 45. In 1 Tim. ii. 6. Christ is said to give himself a ransom for all, ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων ; but that will be considered in the next letter. It is said of the church of God, that he purchased it with his own blood. Tegioncare διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου αίματος. Acts xx. 28. The final deliverance of the whole collective body of the saved from all remains of natural and moral evil, is called, ἀπολύτρωσις τῆς περιποιήσεως, the redemption of the purchased possession, or of the people acquired, or purchased. Ephes. i. 14. On which Calvin remarks, Пegionis, quam latine vertimus acquisitam hæreḍitatem, non est regnum cœlorum, aut beata immortalitas, sed ipsa ecclesia.* Thus in Pet. ii. 9. they are styled, λads εiç TEPITоinov, a people acquired, or purchased to himself in a peculiar manner; or, a people for a peculiar possession. Paul says, 1 Thess. v. 9. "God hath not appointed us to wrath; but to the egoínow owingjas, obtaining, or acquiring of salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that we should live with him." And 2 Thess. ii. 13, 14. he says, "Beloved of the Lord, God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth: whereunto he called you by our gospel, unto spoin doğns, the obtaining or acquisition, of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." Let the impartial judge if these passages do not strongly favour the peculiarity of design in Christ's death. And thus it is said of Christians, yopάconte, ye are bought with a price. 1 Cor. vi. 20. vii. 23. If 2 Pet. ii. 1. should be alleged as an objection, I hope I have given a sufficient reason why that passage is not to be understood of the Saviour's blood, but of God's deliverance

Пegions, which we render the purchased possession, is not the kingdom of heaven, or a blessed immortality, but the church itself.

in a way of providence, p. 89.* It is such a reason, however, as Mr. T. has not attempted to answer.

LETTER XII.

Dear Sir,

MR. T. in his Nine Letters, offered arguments for the universal extent of Christ's death. He argued from the goodness of God over all his works, and from various passages of scripture which speak of the death of Christ in indefinite language The principal of these passages and arguments I have considered in my Reply. Mr. T. in the Eleventh Letter of his last publication, defends his former arguments.

Before I enter on a discussion of particulars, I would observe, that although Mr. T. pleads for the universal extent of Christ's death, yet he pleads for it in no other sense than as laying a foundation for sinners, without distinction, being invited to return home to God by Jesus Christ, with the promise of forgiveness and acceptance on their return. He does not pretend, that there is provision made by the death of Christ for the certain salvation of all men. Now, the thing itself for which he pleads, is no more than I have admitted. It is true I have supposed, that this, being done for men in general, cannot, with propriety, be called dying for them. At the same time, I have allowed, that " "many considerable writers, who are far from denying that the salvation of all the saved is owing to an absolute, and consequently limited, design in the death of Christ, have supposed that, it might; and that the indefinite language of scripture, concerning the death of Christ, is intended to convey to us this idea." The thing itself I do not controvert; only it appeared, to me, that the terms ransom, propitiation, dying for us, &c. were intended to convey something more than this,

Page 314, of this volume.

and what is true only of the finally saved. Now, admitting that I am mistaken in my supposition; admitting that the terms propitiation, ransom, &c. are applicable to mankind in general, and are designed to express that there is a way opened for sinners, without distinction, to return home to God, and be saved; nothing follows from it, but that I have misunderstood certain passages of scripture, by considering them as conveying an indefinite, but not a universal idea. In regard to the sentiment itself, I do not see that Mr. T. pleads for more than I have admitted, except in one instance: we agree that a way is opened, by the death of Christ, for the salvation of sinners, without distinction; and that any man may be saved, if he is willing to come to Christ, that he may have life. Here I stop; but Mr. T. goes a step farther, and maintains, that such a provision of grace is made by the death of Christ, that all men have power to be willing, if they will ♣ but of this I am satisfied no meaning can be made.

I now proceed to particulars, by observing, that, whether my sense of the passages of scripture adduced by Mr. T. be just, or not, it does not appear, to me, that he has invalidated it. He argued, in general, from Psa. cxlv. 9. His tender mercies are over all his works. I answered, that the death of Christ was not the criterion of God's goodness; that fallen angels were a part of God's works, as well as fallen men. Mr. T. replies, by observing, that fallen angels were not here intended. (XIII. 106.) Then, it seems, Mr. T. can sometimes discern a restriction in the word all, though a universal term. Perhaps it may be sufficient to observe, that, whether the phrase all his works intends all fallen angels, or not, it intends more than that part of God's works for which Christ died. Is it not evident from the context, that it denotes God's providential goodness towards the whole animate creation? Is it not said of them, in verse 16, that their eyes wait on HIM; HE openeth his hand, and satisfieth the desire of every living thing?

But Mr. T. contends, that "there is no goodness, no mercy, no tender mercy, exercised toward a person who is placed in such a situation that he could not avoid sinning, and being damned, and whose damnation is necessarily increased by calls and commands to repent, and believe in Christ; when the

great God, whose commands these are, has provided no mer cy for him, nor intends to give him the least assistance, though he knows the poor sinner cannot, nor ever possibly could, obey these calls and commands, any more than he can fly to the moon." (XIII. 106.) To this shocking representation I have only to say, This is not my hypothesis, nor any thing like it; and if Mr. T. thinks it is, it is time to give over controverting the matter with him. The whole passage is mere declamation, founded on the abuse of the terms cannot, could not, &c. If, instead of "cannot, and never could," he had said, will not, and never would, his account of the poor sinner's case would not have appeared so plausible: and yet this, he knows, is the whole of our meaning. Yes, " but if they could never will to comply," says Mr. T. thing' (XIII. 57.) That is, unless they have the power of being willing, if they will. Of this I shall only say, that, when Mr. T. can make sense of it, it will be time enough to answer it.

that amounts to the same

What follows has much more of argument in it. "If the tender mercies of God are over all his works; and if no man can enjoy any mercy, but through Jesus Christ; is it not a natural and reasonable conclusion, that God has given his Son to die for all mankind?" (XIII. 105.) I must observe, however, by the way, that, "if no man can enjoy any mercy, but through Jesus Christ," I cannot but consider this as a full proof, that the whole race were unworthy of all mercy, and that God might, consistently with his justice and essential goodness, have withheld it from them, and treated them as worthy of death: for I have no idea that God needed the death of his Son to induce him to do that, which if he had not done, the omission of it would have exposed him to the charge of cruelty. If Mr. T. had always remembered this consideration, (which, I think, he cannot controvert,) it would have induced him to expunge a great deal of declamation in his letters. Having noted this, I confess I think that much mercy is exercised towards men in general, through Jesus Christ; and, consequently, that his death was productive of effects which terminate on all. Nor do I question, whether the opening of a way for the salvation of all who shall come unto God by him, and for men, without distinction, to be in