A90293:232
Theomachia autexousiastikē
Theomachia autexousiastikē: or, A display of Arminianism. Being a discovery of the old Pelagian idol free-will, with the new goddess contingency, advancing themselves, into the throne of the God of heaven to the prejudice of his grace, providence, and supreme dominion over the children of men. Wherein the main errors of the Arminians are laid open, by which they are fallen off from the received doctrine of all the reformed churches, with their opposition in divers particulars to the doctrine established in the Church of England. Discovered out of their own writings and confessions, and confuted by the Word of God. / By John Owen, Master of Arts of Queens College in Oxon.Theomachia autexousiastikē: or, A display of Arminianisme. Being a discovery of the old Pelagian idol free-will, with the new goddesse contingency, advancing themselves, into the throne of the God of heaven to the prejudice of his grace, providence, and supreme dominion over the children of men. Wherein the maine errors of the Arminians are laid open, by which they are fallen off from the received doctrine of all the reformed churches, with their opposition in divers particulars to the doctrine established in the Church of England. Discovered out of their owne writings and confessions, and confuted by the Word of God. / By Iohn Owen, Master of Arts of Queens Colledge in Oxon.
London: printed by I.L. for Phil. Stephens, 1643
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.
CHAP. IX.
Of the death of Christ, and of the efficacy of his merits.
Of the death of Christ, and of the efficacie of his merits.
The sum of those Controversies, wherewith the Arminians, and their abettors have troubled the Church, about the death of Christ, may be reduced to heads. First, concerning the object of his merit, or whom he died for. Secondly, concerning the efficacy and end of his death, or what he deserved, procured, merited, and obtained, for them for whom he died: in resolution of the first, they affirm, that he died for all, and every one,: of the second, that he died for no one man at all; in that sense, Christians have hitherto believed that he laid down his life, and submitted himself to bear the burden of his Fathers wrath, for their sakes. It seems to me a strange extenuation of the merit of Christ, to teach, that no good at all by his death doth redound to divers of them for whom he died: what participation, in the benefit of his suffering, had Pharaoh or Judas? do they not at this hour, and shall they not to eternity, feel the wait and burden of their own sins? had they either grace in this world, or glory in the other, that they should be said to have an interest in the death of our Saviour? Christians have hitherto believed, that for whom Christ died, for their sins he made satisfaction; that they themselves should not externally suffer for them: is God unjust to punish twice, for the same fault? his own Son once? and again the poor sinners, for whom he suffered? I cannot conceive an intention in God, that Christ should satisfy his justice for the sin of them, that were in hell some thousands of years before, and yet be still resolved to continue then punishment on them to all eternity? no doubtless; Christ giveth life to everyone, for whom he gave his life: he looseth not one of them, whom he purchased with his blood.