Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the moral law and the covenants, from the…Vindiciae legis, or, A vindication of the morall law and the covenants, from the…

Therefore all and every part, even whole man was liable to death by sin. But what Logician doth not see a great deal more foisted into the Conclusion, then was in the Premises? Whole Adam was to be mortalized, therefore all and every part. What a non sequitur is here? That is true of the whole; as it is the whole, which is not true of every part. If I should say, Whole Christ dyed, (for death is of the concrete, the person) therefore all and every part of Christ died, therefore his divine nature died; this would be a strange inference: yet upon this fallacy is the frame of all his arguments built. Man is said to be mortal, whole man dieth, therefore every part of man dieth. There is difference between totum and totalii as, the whole, and every part of that whole. It's true, death doth bring the compositum, the person, to a non-entity, but not every part of that compositum to a non-entity.

Therefore all and every part, even whole man was lyable to death by sin. But what Logician doth not see a great deale more foisted into the Conclusion, then was in the Premises? Whole Adam was to be mortaliz'd, therefore all and every part. What a non sequitur is here? That is true of the whole; as it is the whole, which is not true of every part. If I should say, Whole Christ dyed, (for death is of the concrete, the person) therefore all and every part of Christ died, therefore his divine nature died; this would be a strange inference: yet upon this fallacy is the frame of all his arguments built. Man is said to be mortall, whole man dieth, therefore every part of man dieth. There is difference between totum and totalii as, the whole, and every part of that whole. It's true, death doth bring the compositum, the person, to a non-entity, but not every part of that compositum to a non-entity.

Besides, that which was immortal, is mortalized, according to their natures, the soul dieth a spiritual and an eternal death. But see how the devil carries this man further, and ⟨p. 112⟩sets him upon the pinnacle of error, and bids him throw himself head-long; because he doth evidently say, that if the souls were destroyed as well as the bodies, then there would be no heaven nor hell as yet; he is bold, and confesseth there is none till the resurrection. Now if this be so, then how shall that be true, that the heaven must contain Christ till he come? This doth exceedingly puzzle him, but he takes the heaven for the place where the Sun is, and concludes peremptorily (as if he had been in the same also) that Christs glorified body is in the Sun: Without doubt (saith he, pag. 33.) he must be in the Sun; and (saith he, pag. 34.) The Sun may be called well the right hand of God, by which through Christ in him we live, and move, and have our being: and there speaketh nothing but darkness about light, as that the Sun is the veil, to keep off the light of Christs body from us, which otherwise would be so glorious, we could not see it and live. But how dare any man make this interpretation, The heavens must contain him, that is, he must be in the Sun, till he come to restitution of all things? The naming of these things is confutation enough, only this I brought as in a passage merely, to see what cause we have to pray to God to keep us from our selves, and our own presumptuous thoughts.