A90278:135
Of the death of Christ, the price he paid, and the purchase he made.…
Of the death of Christ, the price he paid, and the purchase he made. Or, the satisfaction, and merit of the death of Christ cleared, the universality of redemption thereby oppugned: and the doctrine concerning these things formerly delivered in a treatise against universal redemption vindicated from the exceptions, and objections of Mr Baxter. / By J. Owen, minister of the gospel.Of the death of Christ, the price he paid, and the purchase he made. Or, the satisfaction, and merit of the death of Christ cleered, the universality of redemption thereby oppugned: and the doctrine concerning these things formerly delivered in a treatise against universal redemption vindicated from the exceptions, and objections of Mr Baxter. / By J. Owen, minister of the gospel.
London: printed by Peter Cole, 1650
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Let the Reader observe what it is we have in hand.1 It is not the main of the Controversy Debated by Grotius wherein I do oppose him: Neither yet All in that particular whereabout the Opposition is. Now suppose (as he doth) That the punishing of the Person Offending is in the Obligation, yet I cannot but conceive that there be Two distinct things here: 1 The Constitution of the Penalty it self to be undergone. 2 The Terminating of this Penalty upon the Person Offending. For this Latter, I Assert a Relaxation of the Law, which might be done, and yet the Penalty it self in Reference to it's Constitution be ⟨p. 19⟩established. In those places then (In the day thou eatest, &c.) there is Death and the Curse appointed for the Penalty, and the Person Offending appointed for the sufferer. That the Law is Relaxed, in the Latter I grant, That the former was Executed on Christ I prove.
Let the Reader observe what it is we have in hand.1 It is not the main of the Controversie Debated by Grotius wherein I do oppose him: Neither yet All in that particular whereabout the Opposition is. Now suppose (as he doth) That the punishing of the Person Offending is in the Obligation, yet I cannot but conceive that there be Two distinct things here: 1 The Constitution of the Penalty it self to be undergone. 2 The Terminating of this Penalty upon the Person Offending. For this Latter, I Assert a Relaxation of the Law, which might be done, and yet the Penalty it self in Reference to it's Constitution be ⟨p. 19⟩established. In those places then (In the day thou eatest, &c.) there is Death and the Curse appointed for the Penalty, and the Person Offending appointed for the sufferer. That the Law is Relaxed, in the Latter I grant, That the former was Executed on Christ I prove.
- 1Answ.