2. There are some that distinguish between the sufficiency and worth that is in Christs mediation, and the actual application of it, Now (say they) the second Adam was infinitely more able to save, then Adam to destroy, and that if we respect the number of men, for Christ is able to save a thousand of worlds besides this, if there were so many; and therefore if we speak of Christ in respect of his sufficiency, Adam in a destructing way is no more comparable to Christ in a saving way, then a drop to the ocean, or a sinite to an infinite. For the obedience of Christ is the obedience of God and man. Now though this answer may in a good explained sense be received, yet I shall not so much avouch it, partly because the distinction is made use of to a far other end, then the Orthodox do intend; and then partly, because the Apostle doth not here attend, in his comparison, so much to what is sufficient in Christ, as to what is actual; not so much to what he is able to do, as what he will do. It's efficacy not sufficiency the Apostle aimeth at; therefore we stick to the former answer, though in many other respects, the excellency of the second Adam to the first, night be declared, which are not here to be repeated; only that one the Apostle instanceth in, is not to be passed over, which is, that it is but one offence to condemnation, whereas the grace of Christ extendeth to the abolishing of many offences, that one sin is enough to damn, but the grace of Christ appeareth, not only to the abolition of that, but also all offences that do actually flow from it. Thus every godly soul may comfortably improve this truth, that there is more in Christ to save, then is in all sin, whether original or actual to damn; Christ is more able to justify, then Adam is to condemn. Therefore some Schoolmen deny, that Adam's sin did demerit the death and damnation of all mankind, it deserved his own damnation, and his own death only. All other mens deaths, and other mens damnation have for their meritorious cause their original sin inherent in them. Adam did not meritoriously deserve these; but when fallen, then his posterity descending from him, did naturally fall into such a corrupted estate, as he himself was plunged into; and the reason they give of this is, because no mere man can either m•rer•• or demereri, for the whole nature of mankind;
2. There are some that distinguish between the sufficiency and worth that is in Christs mediation, and the actual application of it, Now (say they) the second Adam was infinately more able to save, then Adam to destroy, and that if we respect the number of men, for Christ is able to save a thousand of worlds besides this, if there were so many; and therefore if we speak of Christ in respect of his sufficiency, Adam in a destructing way is no more comparable to Christ in a saving way, then a drop to the ocean, or a sinite to an infinite. For the obedience of Christ is the obedience of God and man. Now though this answer may in a good explained sense be received, yet I shall not so much avouch it, partly because the distinction is made use of to a farre other end, then the Orthodox do intend; and then partly, because the Apostle doth not here attend, in his comparison, so much to what is sufficient in Christ, as to what is actual; not so much to what he is able to do, as what he will do. It's efficacy not sufficiency the Apostle aimeth at; therefore we stick to the former answer, though in many other respects, the excellency of the second Adam to the first, night be declared, which are not here to be repeated; only that one the Apostle instanceth in, is not to be passed over, which is, that it is but one offence to condemnation, whereas the grace of Christ extendeth to the abolishing of many offences, that one sinne is enough to damn, but the grace of Christ appeareth, not only to the abolition of that, but also all offences that do actually flow from it. Thus every godly soul may comfortably improve this truth, that there is more in Christ to save, then is in all sinne, whether original or actual to damn; Christ is more able to justifie, then Adam is to condemn. Therefore some Schoolmen deny, that Adam's sinne did demerit the death and damnation of all mankind, it deserved his own damnation, and his own death only. All other mens deaths, and other mens damnation have for their meritorious cause their original sin inherent in them. Adam did not meritoriously deserve these; but when fallen, then his posterity descending from him, did naturally fall into such a corrupted estate, as he himself was plunged into; and the reason they give of this is, because no meer man can either m•rer•• or demereri, for the whole nature of mankind;
