And lastly, some learned men (who are more sober and moderate then those whom I oppose) do say (but without ground from Scripture, as I humbly conceive) that Christ dyed for every man and woman in the world, in respect of the sufficiency of his merit but not in respect of efficacy. That we should extend the sufficiency and merit of Christ’s death and bloodshed, beyond the purpose, decree, and intention of the Father and the Son, for my part I cannot see any clear ground: ‘tis true, the death and bloodshed of Christ may be said to be sufficient for every man in respect of the intrinsic virtue therefore, it being the blood of God [Acts 2:18.], the blood of that person who is the infinite God. But I conceive that it cannot properly be said to be a sufficient ransom for every man; and why, but because it is not properly a ransom or price paid for every man, nor never was so intended: So then, the sufficiency and efficacy of Christ’s death, are to be jointly limited to them for whom he died and paid the price of redemption; nor did Christ shed one drop or dram of blood in vain; it was by the counsel and appointment of God, that Christ should lay down his life only for them whom the Father gave him; and none of them shall be lost.

I remember the popish Schoolmen have such a distinction of grace sufficient, and grace effectual [Hales 3. Summa. 9.69. Thom. m. 1, 2, 3, 109.]: God (say they) affords grace sufficient to everyone, but not grace effectual. Sufficient grace (as they hold) is that by which a man may be saved, if he will not be wanting to himself; effectual grace is that which saves a man indeed: But this is groundless. Where God tells Paul that his grace is sufficient for him: This sufficiency is not to be abstracted and separated from the efficacy of grace [2 Cor. 12:9.].

William Troughton, Scripture Redemption Restrayned and limitted; or An Antodote against Universal Redemption, in Ten Reasons or Arguments, Deduced from Scripture (London: Printed by J.M. for L. Chapman at  the Crown in Popes Head Alley, 1652), 52-53. [Some reformatting; italics original; some spelling modernized; marginal Scripture references cited inline; and underlining mine.]  [Note: It is probable that Troughton is following closely the wording of Owen on this point.]

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 14th, 2011 at 10:59 am and is filed under Sufficient for All, Efficient for the Elect. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Comments are closed at this time.