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

Arg. 29th. A natura Poenae infernalis Privativae.

If Christ died not for all (but only for the Elect) then the punishment of the damned should not at all consist in a Privation of the But Fruits of Christs Sacrifice (or satisfaction.) the punishment of the damned (at least many, if not all) will consist in a privation of the Fruits of Christs satisfaction, Ergo, &c.

For the better understanding of the force of this Argument you must know, 1. That there may be a Privation of that which we are but in a possibility or probability of enjoying, much more if we have a certainty on some easy, and reasonable condition; specially if the condition be but the accepting of a free gift; as well as there may be a Privation of what is actually enjoyed. ⟨p. 255⟩2. Though some that understand not the nature of the New Covenant or Law do deny that it hath any peculiar penalty, yet it is a clear truth beyond doubt. For 1. It is an entire law, and therefore doth promise and threaten, and consequently doth premiare & punire reward and punish. 2. It is that Law by which we shall be judged at the Redeemers bar, and therefore it doth reward and punish, that is, constitute the dueness of rewards and punishments: else it could not possibly be Norma judicii in Absolution, and condemnation. 3. It is said expressly, Heb. 10. 22. Of how much sorer punishment shall they be thought worthy that tread under Foot the Son of God, &c. And therefore the punishment of unbelievers in the New Testament is expressed to be in unquenchable Fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels, whereas the punishment of the old Law was expressed but by the name of Death, or at least not so hideously as the other. Not that I am any whit of their opinion that think, there was no actual everlasting pain threatened by the old Law, but only annihilation: Nor will I contest against any Man that saith, it is only a punishment gradually different (as to the positive part, and much of the privative) from that of the first Law which is threatened by the second: For a gradual natural difference may constitute a moral specific difference: It is but in degree of pain that a prick with a pin differs from Caesars stabs in the Senate House, or from the pulling of a Mans Flesh of his Back with Nails or hot Pincers. Yet some of the privative, and objective of the