Q. What is the office of Christ?

A. To be a mediator betwixt God and man.

Q. What was required of Christ for making peace and reconciliation

betwixt God and man?

A. That he should satisfy the first covenant whereunto man

was tied.

Q. Wherein was Christ to make satisfaction to the first covenant?

A. In performing that righteousness which the law of God

did require of man; and in bearing the punishment which was

due unto man for breaking of the same law.

Q. How did Christ. perform that righteousness which God’s law

requireth of man?

A. In that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost, without all

spot of original corruption; and lived most holy all the days of

his life without all actual sin.

Q. How did he bear the punishment which was due unto man for

breaking God’s law?

A. In that he willingly, for man’s sake, made himself subject

to the curse of the law, both in body and soul; and, humbling

himself even unto the death, offered up unto his Father a perfect

sacrifice for the sins of the world.

Q. What is required of man for obtaining the benefits of the Gospel?

A. That he receive Christ Jesus whom God doth freely offer

unto him.

Q. By what means are you to receive Christ?

A. By faith, whereby I believe the gracious promises of the


Q. How do you receive Christ by faith?

A. By laying hold of him and applying him with all his

benefits to the comfort of mine own soul.

Ussher’s “The Principles of Christian Religion,” cited by Alexander Mitchell, Catechisms of the Second Reformation, (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1886), 144.






THE all-sufficient satisfaction of Christ, made for the sins of the whole world. The true intent and extent is lubricus locus to be handled, and hath, and doth now much trouble the Church: this question hath been moved sub iisdem terminis quibus nunc, and hath received contrary resolutions ; the reason is, that in the two extremities of opinions held in this matter, there is somewhat true, and somewhat false; the one extremity extends the benefit of Christ’s satisfaction too far, as if hereby God, for his part, were actually reconciled to all mankind, and did really discharge every man from all his sins, and that the reason why all men do not reap the fruit of this benefit, is the want of that faith whereby they ought to have believed, that God in this sort did love them: whence it would follow, that God should forgive a man his sins, and justify him before he believed ; whereas the elect themselves, before their effectual vocation, are said to be “without1 Christ, and without hope, and to be utter strangers from the covenants of promise.”

2. The other extremity contracts the riches of Christ’s satisfaction into too narrow a room; as if none had any kind of interest therein, but such as were elected before the foundation of the world, howsoever by the Gospel every one be charged to receive the same; whereby it would follow, that a man should be bound in conscience to believe that which is untrue, and charged to take that wherewith he hath nothing to do.

Both extremities then, drawing with them unavoidable absurdities: the word of God (by2 hearing whereof, faith is begotten) must be sought unto by a middle course, to avoid these extremities.

For finding out this middle course, we must, in the matter of our redemption, carefully put a distinction betwixt the satisfaction of Christ absolutely considered, and the application thereof to every one in particular: the former was once done for all, the other is still in doing: the former brings with it sufficiency, abundant to discharge the whole debt; the other adds to it efficacy. The satisfaction of Christ only makes the sins of mankind fit for pardon, which without it could not well be; the injury done to God’s majesty being so great, that it could not stand with his honour to put it up without amends made. The particular application makes the sins of those to whom that mercy is vouchsafed to be actually pardoned: for, as all sins are mortal, in regard of the stipend due thereunto by the law, but all do not actually bring forth death, because the gracious promises of the Gospel stayeth the execution: even so all the sins of mankind are become venal, in respect of the price paid by Christ to his Father (so far, that in shewing mercy upon all, if so it were his pleasure, his justice should be no loser,) but all do not obtain actual remission, because most offenders do not take out, nor plead their pardon as they ought to do. If Christ had not assumed our nature, and therein made satisfaction for the injury offered to the divine Majesty, God would not have come unto a treaty of peace with us, more than with the fallen angels, whose nature the Son did not assume: but this way being made, God holds out to us the golden sceptre of his word, and thereby not only signifieth his pleasure of admitting us unto his presence, and accepting of our submission, which is a wonderful grace, but also sends an embassage unto us, and “entreats3 us that we would be reconciled unto him.”

Hence, we infer against the first extremity, that by the virtue of this blessed oblation, God is made placable unto our nature (which he never will be unto the angelical nature offending) but not actually appeased with any, until he hath received his son, and put on the Lord Jesus. As also against the latter extremity, that all men may be truly said to have interest in the merits of Christ, as in a common, though all do not enjoy the benefit thereof, because they have no will to take it.

The well spring of life is set open unto all: “Whosoever4 will, let him take of the water of life freely,” but many have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep, faith is a vessel whereby we draw all virtue from Christ, and the apostle tells us, that “faith5 is not of all.” Now the means of getting this faith is “the6 hearing of the word of truth, the Gospel of our salvation,” which ministereth this general ground for every one to build his faith upon.

Syllogism. What Christ hath prepared for thee, and the Gospel offereth unto thee, that oughtest thou with all thankfulness to accept, and apply to the comfort of thy own soul.

But Christ by his death and obedience hath provided a sufficient remedy for the taking away of all thy sins, and the Gospel offereth the same unto thee. Therefore thou oughtest to accept, and apply the same to the comfort of thine own soul.

Now this Gospel of salvation many do not hear at all, being destitute of the ministry of the word; and many hearing do not believe, or lightly regard it; and many that do believe the truth thereof, are so wedded to their sins, that they have no desire to be divorced from them, and therefore they refuse to accept the gracious offer that is made unto them. And yet notwithstanding their refusal on their part, we may truly say, that good things were provided for them on Christ’s part, and a rich “price7 was put into the hands of a fool, howsoever he had no heart to use it.”

Our blessed Saviour, by that which he hath performed on his part, hath procured a jubilee for the sons of Adam, and his Gospel is his trumpet, whereby he doth proclaim “liberty8 to the captives, and preacheth the acceptable year of the Lord.” If for all this some are so well pleased with their captivity that they desire no deliverance, that derogates nothing from the generality of the freedom annexed to that year. If one say to sin his old master, “I9 love thee, and will not go out free,” he shall be bored for a slave, and serve for ever. But that slavish disposition of his, maketh the extent of the privilege of that year not a whit the straighter, because he was included within the general grant as well as others; howsoever, he was not disposed to take the benefit of it: the kingdom of heaven is like to a certain king that made a marriage of his son, and sent his servants to those that were bidden to the wedding with this message: “Behold10, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen, and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready, come to the marriage.” If we look to the event, they that were bidden made light of their entertainment, and went their ways, “one11 to his farm, and another to his merchandize ;” but that neglect of theirs doth not falsify the word of the king,12 viz. That the dinner was prepared, and these unworthy guests were invited thereunto; “For13 what, if some did not believe, shall their unbelief disannul the faith, and truth of God? God forbid, yea, let God be true, and every man a liar, as it is written, that thou mayest be justified in thy sayings, and overcome when thou judgest. Let not the house of Israel say, the way of the Lord is unequal.” For when he cometh to judge them, the inequality will be found on their side, and not on his.

“O14 house of Israel, are not my ways equal, and your ways unequal saith the Lord. The Lord is right in all his ways, and holy in all his works. All the ways of our God are mercy and truth;” when we were in our sins it was of infinite mercy that any way or remedy should be prepared for our recovery. And when the remedy is prepared, we are never the nearer, except he be pleased of his free mercy to apply the same to us, that so the whole praise of our redemption, from the beginning to the end thereof, may entirely be attributed to the riches of his grace, and nothing left to sinful flesh wherein it may rejoice.

The freeing of the Jews from the captivity of Babylon, was a type of that great deliverance, which the Son of God hath wrought for us.

Cyrus, king of Persia, who was Christus Domini (and herein but a shadow of Christus Dominus, the author of our redemption) published his proclamation in this manner: ” Who15 is amongst you of all his people, the Lord his God be with him, and let him go up.” Now it is true, they alone did follow this calling, whose spirit God had raised to go up.16 But could they that remained still in Babylon, justly plead, that the king’s grant was not large enough, or that they were excluded from going up by any clause contained therein? The matter of our redemption purchased by our Saviour Christ lieth open to all, all are invited to it, none that hath a mind to accept of it, is excluded from it. “The beautiful feet of those that preach the Gospel of peace, to bring glad tidings” of good things to every house where they tread. The first part of their message being this peace to this house.17 But, unless God be pleased out of his abundant mercy ” to guide our feet into the way of peace,” the rebellion of our nature is such, that we run headlong to the ” ways18 of destruction and misery, and the ways of peace do we not know.” They have not all obeyed the Gospel,19 all are not apt to entertain this message of peace, and therefore, though God’s ambassadors make a true tender of it to all unto whom they are sent, yet “their peace only resteth on the sons of peace,” but if it meet with such as will not listen to the motion of it, ‘(their20 peace doth again return unto themselves. “The proclamation of the Gospel runneth thus: Let21 him that is athirst come, “for him this grace is specially provided, because none but he will take the pains to come. But lest we should think this should abridge the largeness of the offer, a quicunque vult, is immediately added, and ” whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely:” yet withal this must be yielded for a certain truth, that it is God who must work in us “to will and to do of his good pleasure;” and though the call be ever so loud and large, yet none can “come22 except the Father draw him.” For the universality of the satisfaction derogates nothing from the necessity of the special grace in the application: neither doth the specialty of the one any ways abridge the generality of the other. Indeed Christ our Saviour saith, “I23 pray not for the world, but for them that thou hast given me:” but the consequence hereby referred may well be excepted against, viz. he prayed not for the world, therefore he prayed not for the world; because the latter is an act of his satisfaction, the former of his intercession; which, being divers parts of his priesthood, are distinguishable one from another by sundry differences. This his satisfaction doth properly give contentment to God’s justice, in such sort as formerly hath been declared; his intercession doth solicit God’s mercy. The first contains the preparation of the remedy necessary for man’s salvation; the second brings with it an application of the same. And consequently the one may well appertain to the common nature, which the son assumed, when the other is a special privilege vouchsafed to such particular persons only, as the father hath given him. And therefore we may safely conclude out of all these premises, that “the Lamb of God, offering himself a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world,” intended by giving sufficient satisfaction to God’s justice, to make the nature of man, which he assumed, a fit subject for mercy and to prepare a medicine for the sins of the whole world, which should be denied to none that intended to take the benefit of it: howsoever he intended not by applying this all-sufficient remedy unto every person in particular to make it effectual unto the salvation of all, or to procure thereby actual pardon for the sins of the whole world. So, in one respect he may be said to have died for all, and in another respect not to have died for all; yet so as in respect of his mercy he may be counted a kind of universal cause of the restoring of our nature, as Adam was of the depraving of it; for as far as I can discern, he rightly hits the nail on the head that determineth the point in this manner.


Mors Christi est quasi qua;dam universalis causa salutis; sicut peccatum primi hominis fuit quasi universalis causa damnationis. Oportet autem universalem causam applicari ad unumquodque specialiter, ut effectum universalis causae participet. Effectus igitur peccati primi parentis pervenit ad unumquemque per carnis originem, ef Fectus autem mortis Christi pertingit ad unumquemque per spiritualem regenerationem, per quam Christo homo quodammodo conjungitur et incorporatur.

of the

I CANNOT sufficiently wonder, why such exceptions should be taken against a letter of mine, which without my privity came to so many men’s hands, as if thereby I had confirmed Papism, Arminianism, and I know not what error of Mr. Culverwell’s, which (as you write) is, and hath been, opposed by many, yea, all good men. The papist (saith one) doth thus distinguish a mediator of redemption and intercession; and Bellarmine (saith another) divides the satisfaction and application of Christ. To which, what other answer should I make but this? To hold that Christ is the only mediator of redemption, but that the saints are also mediators of intercession, that Christ by his merits hath made satisfaction to his father in gross, and the pope by his indulgence, and his priests by their oblations in the mass do make a particular application to particular persons. To join thus partners with Christ in this manner in the office of mediation is popery indeed; but he who, attributing the entire work of the mediation unto Christ alone, doth yet distinguish the act of redemption from the act of intercession, the satisfaction made by him unto God, from the application thereof communicated unto men, is as far from popery, as he that thinks otherwise is from the grounds of the catechism ; for that Christ hath so died for all men (as they lay down in the conference of Hague) “ut reconciliationem cum Deo, et peccatorum remissionem singulis impetraverit,” I hold to be untrue, being well assured, that our Saviour hath obtained at the hands of his father reconciliation, and forgiveness of sins, not for the reprobate, but elect only, and not for them neither, before they be truly regenerated, and implanted into himself; for election being nothing else but the purpose of God, resting in his own mind, makes no kind of alteration in the party elected, but only the execution of that decree and purpose, which in such as have the use of reason is done by an effectual calling, in all by spiritual regeneration, which is the new birth, without which no man can see the kingdom of God.

That impetration, whereof the Arminians speak, I hold to be a fruit, not of his satisfaction, but intercession; and seeing I have learned from Christ’s own mouth, “I24 pray not for the reprobate world:” I must needs esteem it a great folly to imagine that he hath impetrated reconcilation and remission of sins for that world. I agree therefore thus far with Mr. Aimes in his dispute against Grevinchovius, that application and impetration, in this matter we have in hand, are of equal extent; and, that forgiveness of sins is not by our Saviour impetrated for any unto whom the merit of his death is not applied in particular. If in seeking to make straight that which was crooked in the Arminian opinion, he hath bended it too far the contrary way, and inclined too much unto the other extremity, it is a thing which, in the heat of disputation, hath befallen many worthy men before him; and, if I be not deceived, gave the first occasion to this present controversy. But I see no reason why I should be tied to follow him in every step, wherein he treadeth: and so much for Mr. Aimes.

The main error of the Arminians25 and of the patrons of universal grace is this, that God offereth unto every man those means that are necessary unto salvation, both sufficiently and effectually; and, that it resteth in the free will of every one to receive, or reject the same; for the proof there of they allege, as their predecessors, the Semipelagians, did before them, that received axiom of Christ’s dying for all men, which being rightly understood, makes nothing for their purpose. Some of their opposites (subject to oversights as well as others) more forward herein than circumspect, have answered this objection, not by expounding (as was fit) but by flat denying that famous axiom: affirming peremptorily, that Christ died only for the elect, and for others nulla modo: whereby they gave the adverse party advantage to drive them unto this extreme absurdity, viz. that seeing Christ in no wise died for any, but for the elect, and all men were bound to believe that Christ died for themselves, and that upon pain of damnation for the contrary infidelity; therefore all men were bound to behove that they themselves were elected, although in truth the matter were nothing so:

Non tali auxilio nee defensoribus istis Tempus eget

Neither is their hope that the Arminians will be drawn to acknowledge the error of their position, as long as they are persuaded the contrary opinion cannot be maintained without admitting that an untruth must be believed, even by the commandment of him that is God of truth, and by the direction of that word, which is the word of truth.

Endeavoring therefore to make one truth stand by another, and to ward off the blow given by the Arminians in such sort that it should neither bring hurt to the truth, nor give advantage to error, admit I failed of mine intent, I ought to be accounted rather an oppugner than anywise an abettor of their fancies. That for the Arminians, Now for Mr. Culverwell, that which I have heard him charged withal, is the former extremity, which in my letter I did condemn, viz. That Christ in such sort did die for all men, that by his death he made an actual reconcilement between God and man; and, that the especial reason why all men reap not the fruit of this reconciliation, is the want of that faith, whereby they ought to have believed that God in this sort did love them. How justly he hath been charged with this error, himself can best tell; but if ever he held it, I do not doubt, but he was driven thereunto by the absurdities, which he discerned in the other extremity; for what would not a man fly unto rather than yield, that Christ in no manner of ways died for any reprobate, and none but the elect had any kind of title to him, and yet so many thousand reprobates should be bound in conscience to believe that he died for them, and tied to accept him for their redeemer and Saviour; yea, and should be condemned to everlasting torments for want of such a faith (if we may call that faith, which is not grounded upon the word of truth) whereby they should have believed that which in itself was most untrue, and laid hold of that in which they had no kind of interest; if they who dealt with Mr. Culverwell laboured to drive out one absurdity by bringing in another, or went about to stop one hole by making two, I should the less wonder at that you write, that though he hath been dealt withal by many brethren, and for many years, yet he could not be drawn from his error. But those stumbling blocks being removed, and the plain word of truth laid open, by which faith is to be begotten, I dare baldly say he doth not hold that extremity wherewith he is charged, but followeth that safe and middle course, which I laid down; for after he had well weighed what I had written, he heartily thanked the Lord and me, for so good a resolution of this question, which for his part he wholly approved, not seeing how it could be gainsayed. And so much likewise for Mr. Culverwell.

Now for Mr. Stock’s public opposition in the pulpit, I can hardly be induced to believe that he aimed at me therein; if he did, I must needs say he was deceived, when he reckoned me amongst those good men, who make the universality of all the elect, and all men to be one. Indeed I wrote but even now, that God did execute his decree of election in all by spiritual generation: but if any shall say, that by all thereby I should understand the universality of all and every one in the world, and not the universality of all the elect alone, he should greatly wrong my meaning, for I am of no other mind than Prosper was: “Habet26 populus Dei plenitudinem suam, et quamvis magna pars hominum salvantis gratiam aut repellat aut negligat, in electis tamen et praescitis atclue ab omni generalitate discsetis,specialis qusedam censetur universitas, ut de toto mundo, totus mundus liberatus, et ‘de omnibus hominibus, omnes homines videantur assumpti.” That Christ died for his apostles,27 for his sheep,28 for his friends,29 for his Church,30 may make peradventure against those, who make all men to have a share alike in the death of our Saviour: but I profess myself to hold fully with him, who said: “ Etsi Christus pro omnibus mortuus est, tamen specialiter pro nobis yassus est, quia pro Ecclesia passus est.” Yea, and in my former writing I did directly conclude, that as in one respect Christ might have been said to die for all, so in another respect truly said not to have died for all; and my belief is, that the principal end of the Lord’s death, was, “that31 he might gather together in one the children of God scattered abroad,” and, that for their sakes he did specially sanctify himself, that they “also32 might be sanctified through the truth.” And therefore it may be well concluded, that Christ in a special manner died for these; but to infer from hence, that in no manner of respect he died for any others, is but a very weak collection, especially the respect by me expressed being so reasonable, that no sober mind advisedly considering thereof can justly make question of it, viz. That the Lamb of God offering himself a sacrifice for the sins of the world, intended by giving satisfaction to God’s justice to make the nature of man which he assumed, a fit subject for mercy, and to prepare a sovereign medicine that should not only be a sufficient cure for the sins of the whole world, but also should be laid open to all, and denied to none, that indeed do take the benefit thereof: for he is much deceived that thinks a preaching of a bare sufficiency is able to yield sufficient ground of comfort to a distressed soul, without giving a further way to it, and opening a further passage.

To bring news to a bankrupt that the king of Spain hath treasure enough to pay a thousand times more than he owes, may be true, but yields but cold comfort to him the miserable debtor: sufficiency indeed is requisite, but it is the word of promise that gives comfort. If here exception be taken, that I make the whole nature of man fit for mercy, when it is as unfit a subject for grace as may be.

I answer. That here two impediments do occur, which give a stop unto the peace, which is to be made betwixt God and man. The one respects God the party offended, whose justice hath been in such sort violated by his base vassals, that it were unfit for his glorious majesty to put up such an injury without good satisfaction. The other respects man the party offending, whose blindness, stupidity, and hardness of heart is such, that he is neither sensible of his own wretchedness, nor God’s goodness, that when God offers to be reconciled unto him, there must be much entreaty to persuade him to be reconciled to God’.33 In regard of the latter I acknowledge with the apostle, “That34 the natural man receives not the things of the spirit, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he, because spiritually discerned.” And this impediment is not taken away by Christ’s satisfaction (which is a work of his priestly function) but by the enlightening of the mind, and softening the heart of the sinner, which are effects issuing from the execution of the prophetical, and kingly office of our Redeemer. When therefore I say, that by Christ’s satisfaction to his Father he made the nature of man a fit subject for mercy, I mean thereby, that the former impediment arising on God’s part is taken away, that if it were not for the other (for the having whereof we can blame none but ourselves, and in the not removing whereof ad cannot say God hath done us any wrong) there were no let, but all men might be saved; and if it pleased God to extend his mercy unto all, as he keeps his freedom therein, in having compassion on whom he will have mercy, and leaving others in blindness, natural hardness of their own heart, yet the worth of Christ’s satisfaction is so great, that his justice therein should be no looser.

But if this justice (you will say) be satisfied, how comes it to pass that God exacts payment again from any? I answer, We must take heed we stretch not our similitudes beyond their just extent, lest at last we drive the matter too far, and be forced to say (as some have done) that we cannot see how satisfaction and forgiveness stand together, and so by denying Christ’s satisfaction be injurious to God’s justice, or by denying remission of sins become injurious to God’s mercy. We are therefore to understand, that the end of the satisfaction of God’s justice is to make way for God’s free liberty in shewing mercy, that so mercy and justice meeting, and embracing one another, God may be just, and the justifier of him that believes in Jesus.35 Now the general satisfaction of Christ, which was the first act of his priestly office, prepares the way for God’s mercy, by making the sins of all mankind pardonable, the interposition of any bar from God’s justice notwithstanding, and so puts the sons of men only in a possibility of being justified, a thing denied to the nature of fallen angels, which the Son was not pleased to assume; but the special application of this satisfaction vouchsafed by Christ unto those persons only whom his father hath given him out of the world, which is an appendant, or appertaineth to the second act of his priesthood, viz. his intercession, produceth this potentia in uctum, that is, procureth an actual discharge from God’s anger; and maketh justification, which before was a part of our possibility, to be a part of our present possession.

If it be said: It is a great derogation to the dignity of Christ’s death to make the sins of mankind only pardonable, and brings in a bare possibility of justification.

I answer, It is a most unchristian imagination to suppose the merit of Christ’s death, being particularly applied to the soul of a sinner, produceth no further effect than this. St. Paul teacheth us that we be not only justifiable, but “justified36 by his blood,” yet not simply as offered on the cross, but “through37 faith in his blood,” that is, through his blood applied by faith. “The blood of Jesus Christ his son,” saith St. John,38 “cleanseth us from all sins;” yet cleanse it doth not by being prepared, but by being applied: prepared it was when he poured it out once upon the cross, applied it is when he washeth us from our sins therein.39 It is one thing therefore to speak of Christ’s satisfaction, in the general absolutely considered; and another thing, as it is applied to every one in particular. The consideration of things as they are in their causes, is one thing; and as they have an actual existence, is another thing. Things as they are in their causes are no otherwise considerable, but as they have a possibility to be. The application of the agent to the patient, with all circumstances necessarily required, is it that gives to the thing an actual being. That disease is curable for which a sovereign medicine may be found, but cured it is not till the medicine be applied to the patient; and if it so fall out, that, the medicine being not applied, the party miscarries, we say, he was lost, not because his sickness was incurable, but because there wanted a care to apply that to him that might have helped him.

All Adam’s sons have taken a mortal sickness from their father, which, if it be not remedied, will, without fail, bring them to the second death : no medicine under heaven can heal this disease, but only a potion confected of the blood of the Lamb of God, who came “to take away the sins of the world;” which, as Prosper truly notes, “habet quidem in se ut omnibus prosit, sed si non bibitur non medetur.” The virtue thereof is such, that if all did take it, all without doubt should be recovered, but without taking it there is no recovery; in the former respect it may be truly said, that no man’s state is so desperate, but by this means it is recoverable, (and this is the first comfortable news that the Gospel brings to the distressed soul) but here it resteth not, nor feedeth a man with such a possibility, that he should say in his heart, “Who shall ascend into heaven to bring Christ from above?” but it brings the word of comfort nigh unto him, even to his mouth and heart, and presents him with the medicine at hand, and desireth him to take it; which being done accordingly, the cure is actually performed.

James Ussher, The Whole Works of the Most Rev. James Ussher, D.D (Dublin, Hodges and Smith; London, Whittaker, 1847), 12:553-571.


1Eph. 2:2.
2Ibid., 1:13.
32 Cor. 5:20.
4Rev. 22:17.
52 Thess. 3:2.
6Eph. 1:13.
8Luke, 4:18, 19.
9Lev.25: 24. Exod. 21:5. Deut.15:26.
10Matt. 22: 4.
11Ibid. ver. 5.
12Matt. 22: 4.
13Rom. 3:3, 4.
14Ezek. 18:29, 30.
152 Chron. 36:23. and 1 Ezra, 2.
16Ezra, 1:5.
17Rom. 10:15, Luke 10:5, 17.
18Rom. 3:16.
19Ibid., 10:16.
20Luke 10:16.
21Rev. 22:17.
22John 6:46.
23John 17:6.
24John 17:9.
25Vid Corvin. in Defens. Armini. cap. 11.
26De vocat. Gent. Lib. 1.
27Luke 22:19.
28John 10:15.
29Ibid., 15:13.
30Eph. 5:25.
31John 11:52.
32John 17:19.
332 Cor. 5:20.
341 Cor. 2:14.
35Rom. 3:26.
36Rom. 5:9.
37Rom. 3:25.
381 John 1:17.
39Rev. 1:5.

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 31st, 2008 at 1:12 pm and is filed under For Whom did Christ Die?. 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.