A27064:246
Universal redemption of mankind, by the Lord Jesus Christ stated and cleared by the…
Universal redemption of mankind, by the Lord Jesus Christ stated and cleared by the late learned Mr. Richard Barter [sic] ; whereunto is added a short account of Special redemption, by the same author.
London: printed for John Salusbury, 1694
OF Universal Redemption. › Chapter 4: The First Proposition Asserted.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
10 Arg. That Doctrine which denieth Christs Satisfaction for us in strict Sense, is not of God: But such is this opposed. Therefore, &c. The Major is plain. Prob. Minor. That Doctrine which affirmeth Christs sufferings to have been the Idem which was required by the Law, and not the Tantundem, doth deny satisfaction in strict Sense: But so doth this opposed: Therefore, &c. The Major is proved by the definition of satisfaction; which strictly taken, is Redditio aequi valentis, as Scotus and other Schoolmen, and Amesius (contra Bellar) from them approving it) or it is, solutio tantidem, ⟨p. 76⟩as Grotius and others, and is distinct from solutio ejusdem, which is solutio strictè sic dicta. Minor. Prob. They that affirm us to have suffered all that the Law required, do affirm us consequently to have suffered the Idem, and not merely the tantundem. But so do they that teach, that we suffered in Christ, &c. Therefore, &c. More of this anon
10 Arg. That Doctrine which denieth Christs Satisfaction for us in strict Sence, is not of God: But such is this opposed. Therefore, &c. The Major is plain. Prob. Minor. That Doctrine which affirmeth Christs sufferings to have been the Idem which was required by the Law, and not the Tantundem, doth deny satisfaction in strict Sence: But so doth this opposed: Therefore, &c. The Major is proved by the definition of satisfaction; which strictly taken, is Redditio aequi valentis, as Scotus and other Schoolmen, and Amesius (contra Bellar) from them approving it) or it is, solutio tantidem, ⟨p. 76⟩as Grotius and others, and is distinct from solutio ejusdem, which is solutio strictè sic dicta. Minor. Prob. They that affirm us to have suffered all that the Law required, do affirm us consequently to have suffered the Idem, and not meerly the tantundem. But so do they that teach, that we suffered in Christ, &c. Therefore, &c. More of this anon
11. Arg. Christ suffered and satisfied in the Person of Mediator; therefore not in the Person of the Elect or Offender: Because a mediator is a middle person, and Christ sustained not two persons as a sufferer.