Never divide or confound His intrinsic and meritorious worth - John Stevens

It is no dishonor to Christ to say, that his atonement is insufficient to save those whom he never knew, never loved, never intended to save. The design of our Lord in his sufferings limited their saving effects: the intrinsic worth of his person, and the meritorious worth of his acts, ought neither to be divided nor confounded. There could be no saving sufficiency in the atonement itself, which divine justice would fail to own and duly reward. If Christ has atoned for the sins of all men, punitive justice cannot smite any of them; if he has only atoned for the sins of many of them, justice cannot spare the rest of them. Our blessed Lord has never benefited any of his sinful creatures unintentionally; nor can they be bound to love and thank him for what he never intended to be for their spiritual advantage.

Whom the Father elects, the Son redeems, and the Holy Ghost sanctifies - Christopher Ness

God the Father's election, God the Son's redemption, and God the Holy Ghost's sanctification, must all be of equal extent and latitude; but universal redemption, in the Arminian sense of it, makes these unequal. This is clear; for as the Father, Word, and Spirit are One in essence, so are they One in willing, working, and witnessing the redemption of sinners. As there are Three that bear witness on earth, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; so there are Three which bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; "and these Three agree in one" (1Jo 5:6,8). Whom the Father elects, the Son redeems, and the Holy Ghost sanctifies. If then there be a universal redemption there must be a universal election, and a universal sanctification also, and so, by consequence, a universal salvation. That the Son redeems no more than the Father elects is evident from two scriptures. The first is John 5:23, which declares the Son must be honoured as equal with the Father; but, to say that the Son redeemed all, and the Father elected but few, is to give greater honour to the One than to the Other, and to make an inequality in Their operations. The second scripture is John 17:9,10: "All Thine are Mine and all Mine are Thine," etc. They were the Father's by electing love, and they became the Son's by gift and redemption: "Thine they were, and Thou gavest them Me" (John 17:6). Christ redeems only those whom the Father gave unto Him. Hence God's "book of life" wherein the number of the elect is recorded, is called also the "Lamb's book of life;" intimating that the number of those elected by the Father is commensurate with those redeemed by the Son. That Christ redeems no greater number than the Spirit sanctifies is evident from 1Jo 5:6,7; there must be water to sanctify where there is blood to redeem. Christ's oblation is not of larger extent than the Spirit's operation. Thus it is most apparent that all the three Persons in the Trinity have one object and one design of love. They are equal in essence, equal in honour, and equal in operation.

The word All - John Bunyan

“All that the Father giveth me.” This word all, is often used in Scripture, and is to be taken more largely, or more strictly, even as the truth or argument, for the sake of which it is made use of, will bear. Wherefore, that we may the better understand the mind of Christ in the use of it here, we must consider, that it is limited and restrained only to those that shall be saved, to wit, to those that shall come to Christ; even to those whom he will “in no wise cast out.” Thus, also, the words all Israel, is sometimes to be taken, although sometimes it is taken for the whole family of Jacob. “And so all Israel shall be saved” (Rom 11:26). By all Israel here, he intendeth not all of Israel, in the largest sense; “for they are not all Israel which are of Israel;” “neither because they are of the seed of Abraham, are they all children; but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, they which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the seed” (Rom 9:6-8).

This word ALL, therefore, must be limited and enlarged, as the truth and argument, for the sake of which it is used, will bear; else we shall abuse Scripture, and readers, and ourselves, and all. “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth,” said Christ, “will draw ALL men unto me” (John 12:32). Can any man imagine, that by ALL, in this place, he should mean all and every individual man in the world, and not rather that all that is consonant to the scope of the place? And if, by being “lifted up from the earth,” he means, as he should seem, his being taken up into heaven; and if, by “drawing ALL men after him,” he meant a drawing them unto that place of glory; then must he mean by ALL men, those, and only those, that shall in truth be eternally saved from the wrath to come. “For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all” (Rom 11:32). Here again you have all and all, two alls; but yet a greater disparity between the all made mention of in the first place, and that all made mention of the second. Those intended in this text are the Jews, even all of them, by the first all that you find in the words. The second all doth also intend the same people; but yet only so many of them as God will have mercy upon. “He hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.” The all also in the text, is likewise to be limited and restrained to the saved, and to them only. But again; — The word “giveth,” or “hath given,” must be restrained, after the same manner, to the same limited number. “All that the Father giveth me.”...

“This is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day” (John 6:39). “And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand” (John 10:28). “As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. Thine they were, and thou gavest them me, and they have kept thy word; I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.” “Keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” “Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world” (John 17:1,6,9,10,24).

All these sentences are of the same import with the text; and the alls and manies, those, they, &c., in these several sayings of Christ, are the same with all the given in the text. “All that the Father giveth.” So that, as I said before, the word ALL, as also other words, must not be taken in such sort as our foolish fancies or groundless opinions will prompt us to, but do admit of an enlargement or a restriction, according to the true meaning and intent of the text. We must therefore diligently consult the meaning of the text, by comparing it with other the sayings of God; so shall we be better able to find out the mind of the Lord, in the word which he has given us to know it by.

The almost intolerable load of imputed sin - J.C. Phipot

“My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Mark 15:34) It was not the nails driven through His hands and feet—it was not the crown of thorns placed upon His brow—it was not the stripes which mangled His back—it was not the languor and faintness under which He suffered—that caused the Lord to die. It was not the mere bodily agony of the cross—it was not the mere pain, though most acute and severe, of the nails driven through His sacred hands and feet. It was not the being stretched upon the cross six hours, that constituted the chief part of the Redeemer’s suffering. But it was the almost intolerable load of imputed sin — the imputed sins of millions — it was the tremendous pouring of the wrath of God into His holy soul — it was the hiding of His Father’s face, and the very pangs of hell that there caught hold of Him! Our suffering Savior drank the cup of the wrath of God to the very dregs—when our vile, dreadful, and horrible sins were laid upon Him! “Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief: when You shall make His soul an offering for sin.” (Isaiah 53:10)" -J.C. Philpot

"If duty faith were a truth... salvation would be as universal as the spread of the gospel... if all men had but done their duty... It is to say, "that Christ hath wrought no redemption at all" by John Foreman

Many are following the path of Andrew Fuller's universal sufficiency through their duty-faith universalism. Duty-faith is a form of Hypothetical Universalism

John Foreman took careful notice of this,

Salvation as universal as the spread of the gospel... if all men had but done their duty

"If duty faith were a truth, it must have some meaning with God in regard to salvation; and such a meaning too, as that if it were the universal duty of all men, wherever the gospel comes, to believe unto salvation, then salvation would be as universal as the spread of the gospel, if all men did but do their duty. And the great reason at last -why salvation is not as universal as the spread of the gospel, will be because all men did not do their duty. And so salvation finally, will not be so extensive as it might have been, if all men had but done their duty; nor so extensive as it ought to have been, if all men ought as their duty to have believed unto salvation; nor so extensive as God himself expected, if, as a duty, he expected all men where the gospel came to believe unto salvation. This brings all the counsels, purposes, covenant settlements, revealed truths, promises, and acts of the grace of God unto salvation, into immediate subjection to, and a waiting for the duty of man; and that too in such a way, as that the duty of man, and not the good pleasure of God's will, shall and must determine the final issue of the whole! I can make nothing more or less than this, of the duty of all, where the gospel comes, to believe unto salvation." -John Foreman

It is to say, "that Christ hath wrought no redemption at all"

"We are not opposed to a large redemption, but to the notion of any being lost whom Christ hath redeemed; and to that of his having done any part of his saving work for those who will be lost. In my opinion, it is as far off from the truth of God, and as awfully opposed to the truth of God, to say that Christ, who is the God-Man mediator of the better covenant, hath wrought out a universal redemption, but which will prove all in vain, perish, and come to nothing, from certain causes in man, as far as salvation fails to be universal, as it is to say, `that Christ hath wrought no redemption at all, and that he only lived a good and holy life, and died a martyr, to set us an example, that by following the same we may go to heaven by a good moral life.' Both these notions are alike opposed to the truth of God, only one holds that he hath done the greatest and most glorious of all his works, to a vast extent in vain; and the other holds that he hath done no such work at all. Both these are strongholds of Satan, but the first in the present day commands the popular piety." -John Foreman

William Rushton on "An Atonement sufficient for the salvation of the whole world"

"...we must either acknowledge an objective fullness in Christ’s atonement sufficient for the salvation of the whole world, were the whole world to believe in him..." -Andrew Fuller

Rushton's responds:

"It has just been asserted that the sufficiency which Mr. Fuller attributes to the atonement is the same which the Arminians ascribe to their universal redemption. Whatever difference exists between him and them on other points, on redemption there is only a verbal variation. When Mr. Fuller asserts that the atonement of Christ is sufficient for all mankind, he does not mean that Christ so died for all mankind as to render their salvation certain: he only means that the atonement is sufficient for their salvation conditionally that is, if they will believe. Dr. Whitby, the champion of Arminanism, explains his doctrine thus: "When we say that Christ died for all, we do not mean that he died for all, or any absolutely, or without any conditions to be performed on their part, to interest them in the blessings of his passion; but only that he died for all conditionally, or so that they should be made partakers of the blessings of his salutary passion, upon condition of their faith, repentance, &c." Here we find no essential difference between Mr. Fuller and Dr. Whitby on the atonement of Christ; the only difference between them relates to the purpose of God in reference to its application. Both agree in regarding the death of Christ as conditionally sufficient for all mankind; but the Doctor denies that the purpose of God ascertains the application of the atonement to any man; and in this respect he is more consistent with himself than Mr. Fuller.

The coincidence of indefinite redemption with the Arminian scheme, may be further confirmed by comparing Mr. Fuller’s words with another quotation from the acute and learned Whitby. Mr. Fuller defines reconciliation to be a "satisfaction of divine justice, by virtue of which nothing pertaining to the moral government of God, hinders any sinner from returning to him; and it is upon this ground that sinners are indefinitely invited to do so." He considers the atonement "as a divine extraordinary expedient for the exercise of mercy consistently with justice, and that is in itself equally adapted to save the world as an individual, provided a world believed in it." Now, let us hear the Doctor express the very same sentiments in other words: "He (that is, Christ) only by his death hath put all men in a capacity of being justified and pardoned, and so of being reconciled to, and having peace with God, upon their turning to God, and having faith in our Lord Jesus Christ: the death of Christ having rendered it consistent with the justice and wisdom of God, with the honor of his majesty, and with the ends of government, to pardon the penitent believer." Would to God that Mr. Fuller had been found in better company!

If it be necessary to pursue this "yea and nay" system still further, it is only to disclose more inconsistencies and more absurdities. If, as Mr. Fuller allows, Christ intended that only some should be benefited by his death, then he accomplished his intention according to particular redemption, by paving their ransom only. It is absurd to represent Christ as paying a ransom sufficient for all, when he intended only to redeem some! Or to affirm that Christ is a sufficient Saviour of those whom he never intended to save!

Whenever the Scriptures speak of the sufficiency of redemption, they always place it in the certain efficacy of redemption. The atonement of Christ is sufficient because it is absolutely efficacious, and because it carries salvation to all for whom it was made. It is sufficient, not because it affords men the possibility of salvation but because, with invincible power, it accomplishes their salvation. Hence the word of God never represents the sufficiency of the atonement as more extensive than the design of the atonement, which Mr. Fuller has done. The Scriptures know nothing of a sufficient redemption which leaves the captive to perish in slavery, nor of a sufficient atonement which never delivers the guilty; but they speak of a redemption every way sufficient and efficacious a redemption which cannot be frustrated, but which triumphantly accomplishes the salvation of all its objects. "Let Israel hope in the Lord; for with the Lord there is mercy, and with him plenteous redemption. And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities." Ps. cxxx. 7, 8."

http://grace-ebooks.com/library/William%20Rushton/WR_Defense%20of%20Particular%20Redemption%20A.pdf

The dreadful consequences attending such errors

"He will cause the drink of the thirsty to fail." The drink of the thirsty soul is the efficacy of the Saviour's blood, or the atonement of Christ received and enjoyed under the operations of the Spirit of grace. The water of life is the quickening energy of the Spirit; and the river of God's pleasure is the love of God in Christ Jesus, which is felt under the influence of God's Spirit, and which fills the soul with joy, peace, and divine consolation, in believing. But as pardon and eternal peace with God, through the blood of the Lamb, are denied by this vile person; and as the everlasting inhabitation of the Spirit is opposed and denied also; and the doctrine of the eternal love of God reprobated; and the gift of eternal life exploded, by asserting that all these things may be forfeited and lost? the dreadful consequences attending such errors must be, that divine refreshment, the pure stream of life and peace, will be rarely found; the Spirit is grieved, and ceases to operate." - William Huntington

The highest reproach upon the dignity of the Son of God, and the merit of his blood - George Whitefield

“I would hint further, that you unjustly charge the doctrine of reprobation with blasphemy, whereas the doctrine of universal redemption, as you set it forth, is really the highest reproach upon the dignity of the Son of God, and the merit of his blood. Consider whether it be not rather blasphemy to say as you do, “Christ not only died for those that are saved, but also for those that perish.” The text you have misapplied to gloss over this, see explained by Ridgely, Edwards, Henry; and I purposely omit answering your texts myself so that you may be brought to read such treatises, which, under God, would show you your error. You cannot make good the assertion that Christ died for them that perish without holding (as Peter Bohler, one of the Moravian brethren, in order to make out universal redemption, lately frankly confessed in a letter) that all the damned souls would hereafter be brought out of hell. I cannot think Mr. Wesley is thus minded. And yet unless this can be proved, universal redemption, taken in a literal sense, falls entirely to the ground. For how can all be universally redeemed, if all are not finally saved? Dear Sir, for Jesus Christ’s sake, consider how you dishonour God by denying election. You plainly make salvation depend not on God’s free grace, but on man’s free-will. And if thus, it is more than probable, Jesus Christ would not have had the satisfaction of seeing the fruit of his death in the eternal salvation of one soul. Our preaching would then be vain, and all invitations for people to believe in him would also be in vain. But, blessed be God, our Lord knew for whom he died. There was an eternal compact between the Father and the Son. A certain number was then given him as the purchase and reward of his obedience and death. For these he prayed (Jn. 17:9), and not for the world. For these elect ones, and these only, he is now interceding, and with their salvation he will be fully satisfied.” -George Whitefield (From his letter to John Wesley)


A brief Bio of Whitefield:
“More than 18,000 sermons were to follow in his lifetime, an average of 500 a year, or ten a week, of course these were not all original, but as a travelling evangelist Whitefield was able to use many of them again and again in vary forms. It is to be regretted that less than 90 of these sermons have survived in any form… The largest audience he ever addressed was at Cambuslang, not far from Glasgow, where he spoke to around 100,000 people! He preached for an hour and a half to the tearful crowd. Converts from that one meeting numbered up to 10,000. Once he preached to 30,000; another day he had five services with 20,000 people at each. Afterwards he went on to the Scottish capital city of Edinburgh where he preached to another 20,000. In travelling from Glasgow to Edinburgh he preached to 10,000 souls every day. He loved it so much he cried out, “May I die preaching,”


Quoted from:
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/freegrace/library/Whitefield/whitefieldbiog.html

Martyred because of Particular Redemption - Gottschalk of Orbais

These are some quotes from a man named "Gottschalk of Orbais" from the 9th century:


"Indeed, just as He [God] predestined all of the elect to life through the gratuity of the free grace of His kindness, as the pages of the Old and New Testaments very clearly, skillfully, and soberly show those seeking wisdom on this matter, so also He altogether predestined the reprobate to the punishment of eternal death, of course, through the most righteous judgment of His immutable justice." (Fragment from Hincmar of Rheims, De pradestinatione, 5 [PL 121, p. 365 - translation Genke & Gumerlock]; similar comments are found in Godescalc's own Longer Confession).


"... the one who says that the Lord suffered generally for all, for the salvation and redemption of both the elect and reprobate, contradicts God the Father Himself" (Tome to Gislemar - translation Genke & Gumerlock)


"... Therefore, if God gave His Son even for all of the reprobate, then He has given to them with Him all good things, and through this also eternal life. But He has not given them with Him all good things. Therefore, He did not give Him up for them ... Therefore, if Christ died even for the reprobate, then the reprobate too, having been justified in His blood, will be saved from wrath through Him. But the reprobate will not be saved from wrath through Him. Therefore, Christ did not die for the reprobate." (Answers to Various Questions - translation Genke & Gumerlock)


Gottschalk was actually imprisoned and eventually murdered for his views on predestination and limited atonement. "The Synod deposed Gotteschalk from the priesthood, ordered his books to be burned, ordered him to be shut up in a monastery, and had him publicly whipped. But the cruel Hincmar was not yet finished with his "rebellious" monk. Evidently unable to tolerate any disagreement with his position, he was determined to force Gotteschalk to recant. Within the walls of the monastery Gotteschalk was whipped so severely that he nearly died. But as he lay on the floor of his torture chamber, bloody and near death, he continued to refuse to retract his position. Even the rage of Hincmar could not elicit from this saint a denial of what he believed to be God's truth. The treatment of Gotteschalk was so cruel that it was protested by some leading clerics of his day. ...After twenty years of imprisonment, Gotteschalk died at the age of 62 or 63 in the year 868." http://www.prca.org/books/portraits/gottes.htm

WHY DID CHRIST DIE? by William Gadsby

WHY DID CHRIST DIE?


William Gadsby


According to some people, Christ died to give all a chance of being saved! I do not know that I hate anything more in my soul than to hear that. It makes Jesus Christ so little–that He should do so much, and after all only to get us a chance of being saved. Why, if a man is set up in business, you see how often it happens that he fails in it; and if man cannot manage the paltry things of time and sense without being insolvent, what will he do with eternal realities? And if you come a little closer, when God "made man upright" and he had no sinful nature, what did he do with his innocence? He lost it all! And yet poor presumptuous man has the vanity to think you and I could manage the chance of being saved. What an insult it is to the Lord Jesus Christ to fix the eternal honour of God upon chance, and that chance to be managed by a poor sinful creature who is tumbling into half a dozen holes every hour of his life! NO, NO. Thanks be to God for immortal realities and certainties. WHAT IS SAID CONCERNING WHAT CHRIST HAS DONE? He has "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself;" He has "finished transgression and made an end of sin;" He has "redeemed us from all iniquity;" He has "redeemed us from the curse of the law," from destruction and from the power of the devil; He has "obtained eternal redemption for us;" He has "redeemed us to God." To the honour of the Eternal Trinity it is said, not that the redeemed shall have a chance, but that the redeemed shall "come to Zion with songs, and everlasting joy shall be upon their heads, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away." The Lord Jesus Christ has done this "great" work; and He has gone to heaven shouting "Victory," for "God is gone up with a shout; the Lord with the sound of a trumpet." He rose from the grave as a demonstrative proof that sin was destroyed, law satisfied, God honoured, His people eternally and everlastingly saved. And the immortal honours of God unite in their salvation; therefore, He ever lives at the right hand of the Father to make intercession.

Deprived of that rich provision - William Rushton

"For wherever the precious doctrines of grace are kept back in the public ministry of the word, there, though carnal professors may be pleased, the saints will be deprived of that rich provision which God hath laid up for them; they will decline in the exercise of faith and love, and communion of saints will degenerate into formal worship. That this is the sad condition of many of Zion’s children in the present day is beyond a doubt." -William Rushton

Covenant union... they know nothing of it - WIlliam Rushton

"But the advocates of indefinite and universal redemption seem not to acknowledge this covenant union. They believe that God has a peculiar regard for pious people, but as for that conjugal covenant relationship, which flows from electing love and everlasting kindness, they know nothing of it. This federal connection arises out of discriminating love and is consistent only with special redemption, because all the blessings of the everlasting covenant are ratified by that blood which was shed for many." -William Rushton