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

Prob. Min. That Doctrine which chargeth God with punishing those that have made him full payment, doth consequentially deny the justice of his Judgments. But such is the Doctrine in question. Therefore, &c. 1. That it teacheth that we have fully paid the debt in Christ, is past question▪ ••• that God punisheth the Elect ⟨p. 73⟩1. Is put out of doubt by frequent express testimony of Scripture, 2. And is confessed by themselves as many as are of competent understanding, and moderation. For 1. that paternal Chastisements is a species of punishment, is known to all that know what punishment is; viz. Malum Passionis propter malum culpae: V•l privatio boni naturalis propter privationem boni moralis: Or suffering inflicted for a fault. 2. However, I have met with few of an ordinary understanding, that will deny that God punisheth his Elect, before, Conversion, while they are Children of wrath, and condemned already, and under the Curse of the Law.

The Major is also plain. It is injustice to punish those to whom no punishment is due: But no punishment is due to them that have fully suffered for all Sin: Therefore to punish them that have so suffered is injustice. I know God is absolute Lord of the Creature, and therefore may in that regard use them as he please: And therefore I say, as Twice, that he may without injustice torment or afflict the most innocent Creature, (supposing him not to have promised the contrary, and to be only Dominus, & non Rector): But (saith Twice) he cannot punish the innocent: For that is a contradiction and so impossible. For all punishment is for sin. Affliction is but the matter of punishment and not the form. Besides; God being Rector of the reasonable Creature, and having expressed in his Laws, that he will not punish Men that deserve it not, it is not to be charged on him. If any say, God is not capable of injustice, if you should suppose the breach of his promise? I say, 1. as Abraham Gen. 18. 25