Universal redemption of mankind, by the Lord Jesus Christ stated and cleared by the…

The major I prove thus. He that oweth nothing, or to whom no penalty is due, can have •one forgiven him: But he that hath paid all the debt, or undergone all the punishment that was ••e, by himself or another that in Law-Sense is himself, doth owe nothing, or to him no penalty • due: Therefore he can have none forgiven him. •ob. Major, Remissio est Debiti Remissio: Therefore where there is no due, there can be no re••ssion Prob. Minor To have paid or suffered all, […] to owe some, are contradictory and inconsistent. Therefore he that hath paid all, owes no••ing.

The major I prove thus. He that oweth nothing, or to whom no penalty is due, can have •one forgiven him: But he that hath paid all the •ebt, or undergone all the punishment that was ••e, by himself or another that in Law-Sence is himself, doth owe nothing, or to him no penalty • due: Therefore he can have none forgiven him. •ob. Major, Remissio est Debiti Remissio: There••re where there is no due, there can be no re••ssion Prob. Minor To have paid or suffered all, 〈…〉 to owe some, are contradictory and inconstent. Therefore he that hath paid all, owes no••ing.

The Antinomians Answer is this. It is true that no punishment is due to the Elect, and none is properly forgiven them now since Christs Death: But Christs assuming their Persons in satisfying, was a Remission to them: Or God did in one instant remit it to them and transfer it on Christ. Reply. 1. Christs assuming our Persons, is not remission of Sin. 2. If God did remit it to us, when he transferred it on Christ, and yet we Legaliter, suffered in Christ, then God did both remit the whole debt to us, and receive satisfaction in Law-Sense from us, at the same time: But that is a contradiction. Therefore, &c.