Polanus :

1)

4. Moreover, the will of God, is either the goodness of God, or the justice of God.

The goodness of God, is his will, by which, he himself is by all means good, being both in himself and without, the author of all good things.

In himself he is good, by his essence, and chiefly.

In his essence, because he is good, not by participation of God from another, but naturally, and of himself, and that from eternity: neither is he so, by accidental goodness, but it is his own very goodness.

Chiefly, because he only is the chief good, that is to be desired of all.

Without himself, he is the author of all goodness, both in making so many good creatures, and also by doing good to the creatures that he hath made.

This goodness of God, by which he is the author of all good things without himself, is either general or special.

General is that, which generally extends itself to all creatures, not only towards them, which have continued in that goodness in which they were created, but also towards those which have fallen from their first goodness, as toward the evil angels, and wicked men.

The special goodness of God is that, by which God wills well to the elect angels, and his chosen among men. Psalm 73:1.

Moreover, the goodness of God, is the fountain of the grace, love, mercy patience and clemency of God.

The grace of God, is God’s most gentle goodwill, and his fatherly favour and will, by which he fatherly embraces us unworthy of it, and no man deserving it. Genes. 6:8, Luke 1:30, Tit. 2:11.

And this grace is truly and rightly termed grace, that makes us accepted before God.

But it is not poured into us.

Neither is it a quality inherent un us, but remains only in God’s himself.

It is distinguished from the gifts, which from God and bestowed upon vs Rom. 5:15, which are called graces freely given.

The love of God, is the most gracious will of God, by which he delights himself takes pleasure in that, wich he approves.

And this love of God, is both towards himself, and also towards the creatures.

The love of God towards himself, is that wherewith the persons of the Godhead love mutually, and each one the other. John 3:35.

The love of God towards the creatures, is either general or special.

The general love of God, is that with he embraces altogether all things which he has made, and does good unto them, and preserves and sustains them.

For though he hate sin, yet he loves the nature which he has created.

The special love of God is that, which he doth peculiarly prosecute the elect only.

And this is either towards Christ as in respect of his human nature, or towards the elect in Christ.

The love of God towards Christ as in respect of the human nature is that, by which he has appointed him, to be the head of the elect.

And this love is the foundation of his love towards the elect.

The love of God towards the elect in Christ is both towards the holy Angels, and also towards men that shall be saved. Ephes. 1:6, John 3:16.

The mercy of God, is his most favourable good will, ready to succour such, as are in misery. The general mercy of God, is that by which God, as God, is not only prest [pressed?] to succour all his creatures, & specially men both just and unjust, being in any misery, but does indeed help & relieve them, though not all unto eternal life, yet unto some salvation, or as we may say, temporary deliverance, Luke 6:36.

The special mercy of God is that, by which God, as a most bountiful and free Lord, has mercy upon whom he will. I mean of these, whom he has predestinated to eternal life, whom he also calls, justifies, and glorifies. Rom. 9:18. He has mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardens.

The patience of God, is his most gracious will, by which he long suffers men’s sins, and defers the punishment thereof. And this is called the long sufferance of God, Rom. 2:4. and 3:26. and 9:22. 1 Pet. 3:20. 2 Pet. 3:15.

The clemency of God, is his most favourable will, by which also even in wrath he remembers his mercy, and spares us, though we have deserved otherwise.

Amandus Polanus, The Substance of Christian Religion, (London: Arn. Hatfield, 1600), 16-19.

2)

Arg. 5. He that has mercy on all, & loves all things that are, and hates nothing of that he has made, doubtless his will is not the cause &c. but those things are true of God: ergo: Wis. 11:24&c.

Asw. There is an homonymy in the words to have mercy, to love, to hate: For the proposition is meant a special love and mercy, by which God as a most free Lord has mercy on whom he will Rom. 9:18. and an especial love which peculiarly he extends to his elect, enriching them wit all the benefits thereof, in which he loved Jacob Mal. 1:2; Ro. 9:13. and a special hate by which God (having chosen to salvation whom he would) passed over whom he would, such as he used toward Esau Mat. 1:3; Rom. 9:13.

But the assumption and place out of the book of wisdom, God’s general mercy extends to all creatures that are in any miseries, and therein to all men as well as unjust as just, wherein he is prone to succor them and does indeed preserving and nourishing all things even the very ravens hat are Psal. 147:9. that is that croke.

The old translation has “that call on him,” but that is not so in the Hebrew: that is his own. So likewise his general love &c, so God hates nothing of that he has made so far forth as he made it.

Amandus Polanus, A Treastise of Amandus Polanus Concerning God’s Eternal Predestination (Printed by John Legat, Printer to the University of Cambridge, 1599), 177-178.  [C.f. Polanus on the Providence of God.]

Polhill:

Object. 4.

If Christ died for all men, then he was a surety for all, and satisfied for the sins of all, and consequently God hath a double satisfaction; one in Christ the surety, and another in the persons of the damned, which is against the nature of his justice. In this argument are two consequences to be weighed. 1. If Christ died for all, then he was a surety for all, and satisfied for the sins of all. 2. If Christ so satisfied for the sins of all, then God bath a double satisfaction, which is against justice. As to the first consequence, I admit it as a very truth, that Christ was a surety for all, and satisfied for the sins of all; for if all did believe and repent, the sins of all should be remitted, and remitted they could not be; without a surety, and a surety making a satisfaction; therefore, such a surety was Christ for them all. As to the second consequence, if Christ satisfied for the sins of all, then God hath a double satisfaction, and that is against justice. I shall first premise some distinctions, and then answer. 1. I shall premise three distinctions.

1. Either the first satisfaction was made to the creditor or law-giver by the debtor or offender himself, or else it was made by a surety; if it was made by himself, justice forbids a second satisfaction.

2. In the first satisfaction being made by a surety, was either made by a surety of the debtor’s or offender’s own procuring, or else by a surety procured by the creditor or law-giver; if it was made by a surety procured by the debtor or offender himself, justice forbids a second satisfaction; for it is all one as if he had satisfied by himself.

3 When a surety provided by the creditor or lawgiver makes the first satisfaction, either he makes satisfaction in such sort, as that the debtor or offender shall be thereby immediately, ipso facto, without any more ado, discharged; or else e makes satisfaction in such sort, as that the debtor or offender shall be thereby discharged, but upon the performance of some conditions, and not otherwise; if the surety make satisfaction in the former way, still justice forbids a second satisfaction; but if he make satisfaction in the latter way, then upon the final non-performance of those conditions, justice may admit a second satisfaction. I will illustrate this by two instances. Suppose a man indebted to another in £1,000, the creditor procures his son to lay down the money in satisfaction of the debt, but withal it is agreed between them, that the debtor shall be discharged from his debt if he assent to this payment and not otherwise; if then the debtor dissent, the creditor may justly demand of him a second satisfaction. Again, suppose multitudes of attainted traitors be shut up in prison, and the king procures his son to suffer punishment in their stead, but withal the king and his son proclaim it as a law, that none of the traitors shall be thereby absolved, unless such as honour and do homage unto them; if any traitor refuse to do it, the king may justly exact a second satisfaction; and the reason of both is this, because the debtor or traitor not performing the conditions, can have no benefit by the first satisfaction, and therefore must be subject to a second, as if there had been no first at all. 2. These distinctions premised, I answer, men’s I sins are debts and rebellions, and satisfaction for them is due to God as the great creditor and lawgiver; but this satisfaction was not made by men themselves, but by Jesus Christ as their surety, and this surety was not procured by men, but provided by God himself; and being provided by God, he did not pay down his satisfactory blood in such sort, as that men should be thereby immediately, ipso facto, absolved from their debts and rebellions, but in such sort, as that men may be acquitted from their debts and rebellions if they re pent and believe; wherefore, if they do neither, they can have no benefit by Christ’s satisfaction, and by consequence a second satisfaction may be justly exacted from them.

Now for the more distinct clearing of this momentous objection, I shall propose four things. 1. God out of mere grace procured Christ to be a surety for men; and therefore it was in his power to prescribe the conditions, upon the performance or non-performance whereof men should have or not have benefit by Christ’s satisfaction.

2. According to this power, God hath plainly set down the conditions in the gospel, viz. “He that believes shall be saved, and he that believes not shall be condemned.”

3. These conditions being thus set down by God himself, no man falling short of them can have benefit by Christ’s satisfaction. If men will not receive the atonement, (Rom, v. 11), how can they be at peace? If they will not receive remission of sins, (Acts x. 43), how can they be pardoned? We are all in a worse dungeon than Jeremy’s, and if we will not put the cords of grace under our arms, we cannot get out; we are all servants of sin, and if we say to it, we love thee and will not go out free, we must be bored for eternal slaves. Christ hath opened the fountain of his blood, but we must wash in it, (Zach. xiii. 1); Christ hath made a purchase of souls, but we must believe eis peripoiesin psuches, to the purchasing of the soul, (Heb. x. 39) : not that faith is part of the purchase-money, but that it is the condition of the gospel, without which the glorious purchase of Christ profits not; if men live and die in unbelief, ek eti apoleipetai, there remaineth no more sacrifice for them. (Heb. x. 26). Indeed Christ offered a sacrifice for them, but ek eti, the benefit of that sacrifice cloth no more remain unto them; upon their final unbelief they have no more benefit by it than if there had been none at all for them : in which sense I understand that of the father, Si non credis, non tibi descendit, non tibi passus est Christus.

4. If final unbelievers can have no benefit by Christ’s satisfaction, then God may justly require a second satisfaction of them, because they cannot plead the first; and so it is in law as to them as if there had been no first at all. Shimei had a pardon from Solomon, but passing over Kidron lost it; and therefore (notwithstanding the same) was justly put to death for his offence: Jesus Christ as a surety made satisfaction for men, but they through their final unbelief lose the benefit of it; and therefore (notwithstanding the same) God may justly require a second satisfaction from them. It Shimei had pleaded his pardon, Solomon would have told him, That is nothing to thee, ever since thou didst pass over Kidron; and if unbelievers should plead Christ’s satisfaction, God would tell them, That is nothing to you, seeing you have lived and died in unbelief. Edward Polhill, “The Divine Will: Considered in its Eternal Decrees,” in Works, chapt 7, section 4, sub-section 3, Obj., 4., 168-169.

Edward Polhill, “The Divine Will: Considered in its Eternal Decrees,” in Works, chapt 7, section 4, sub-section 3, Obj., 4., 168-169.

John Bunyan:

Sins of the world:

1) Look to it, sinner, here is life and death set before thee; life, if it be not too late to receive it; but if it be, it is not too late for death to swallow thee up. And tell me, will it not be dreadful to be carried from under the gospel to the damned, there to lie in endless torment, because thou wouldst not be delivered therefrom? Will it be comfort to thee to see the Saviour turn Judge? to see him that wept and died for the sin of the world now ease his mind on Christ-abhorring sinners by rendering to them the just judgment of God? For all their abominable filthiness, had they closed with Christ, they had been shrouded from the justice of the law, and should not have come into condemnation. ‘But had been passed from death to life’; but they would not take shelter there; they would venture to meet the justice of God in its fury, wherefore now it shall swallow them up for ever and ever. Bunyan, “Justification by An Imputed Righteousness,” in The Works of John Bunyan, (Banner of Truth, 1991), 1:334.

2) CHRIST TOOK UPON HIM OUR SINS…

Answ. Even so as if himself had committed all our sins; that is, they were as really charged upon him as if himself had been the actor and committer of them all. ‘He hath made him to be sin,’ not only as a sinner, but as sin itself. He was as the sin of the world that day he stood before God in our stead. Some, indeed, will not have Jesus Christ our Lord to be made sin for us; their wicked reasons think this to be wrong judgment in the Lord; it seems, supposing that because they cannot imagine how it should be, therefore God, if he does it, must do it at his peril, and must be charged with doing wrong judgment, and so things that become not his heavenly Majesty; but against this duncish sophistry we set Paul and Isaiah, the one telling us still, ‘the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all’; and the other, that ‘God made him to be sin for us.’ Bunyan, “Light For Then that Sit in Darkness,” in The Works of John Bunyan, (Banner of Truth, 1991), 1:408.

3) Look, then, upon Christ crucified to be as the sin of the world, as if he only had broken the law; which done, behold him perfectly innocent in himself, and so conclude that for the transgression of God’s people he was stricken; that when the Lord made him to be sin, he made him to be sin for us. Bunyan, Light For Then that Sit in “Darkness, in The Works of John Bunyan,” (Banner of Truth), 1:409.

4) Answ. It is said he took them away— ‘Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.’ It is said he put them away— ‘Now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself’ (John 1:29; Heb 9:26). That is, by the merit of his undertaking he brought into the world, and set before the face of God, such a righteousness that outweigheth and goeth far beyond that sin, and so did hide sin from the sight of God; hence, he that is justified is said to have his sins hid and covered—‘Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered’ (Psa 32:1). Covered with the righteousness of Christ—‘I spread my skirt over thee, and covered thy nakedness,’ thy sins (Eze 16:8). Christ Jesus, therefore, having by the infiniteness of his merit taken away, put away, or hidden our sins from the face of God, therefore he raised him up from the dead. Bunyan, “Light For Then that Sit in Darkness,” in The Works of John Bunyan, (Banner of Truth, 1991), 1:416.

Read the rest of this entry »

His name is sometimes spelt: Parreus, or Pareus.

One modern secondary source

1) Christ carried, dissolved, expiated the sins of all, if we consider the magnitude of the price or sufficiency of the ransom, but only the faithful and not of all, if we consider the efficacy, fruit and application of the ransom. “Irenicum,” Source: G. Michael Thomas, The Extent of the Atonement, (Cumbria, UK: Paternoster: 1997), 116.

Two early secondary sources:

2) “And thus Pareus himself in his Irenicon saith, “That the sins of all men lay on Christ; and so he died for all, that is, for all mens sins as the cause of his death: And you may tell any wicked man, Thy sins killed Christ (what-ever the deniers say to excuse them).” Richard Baxter, Catholick Theologie (London, 1675), I.ii.53.

3) “The cause and matter of the passion of Christ was the sense and sustaining of the anger of God excited against the sin, not of some men, but of the whole human race; whence it arises, that the whole of reconciliation was not obtained or restored to all.  [Act. Synod. Dortrect. p. 217.]”

David Paraeus, “Letter to the Synod of Dort, on the Second Article of the Remonstrants,” cited by John Davenant, A Dissertation on the Death of Christ, 1832, 2:356.

Primary sources:

4) “Thou wast slain”] that is, by dying for the sins of the world, that declares thyself to be the Messiah, whom Isaiah forward should be led “as a sheep to the slaughter,” to take away the sins of the world. Here we are taught that the mediator ought both to be slain for us, that is, to merit: and also to take the book, that is meritoriously to bestow life an righteousness upon others. Seeing therefore he only merited by his sacrifice, it must necessarily follow, that none else could take the book, that is, reveal the counsel of God to the Church, and by his power give salvation.

“And thou has redeemed us to God by thy blood”] Now the Church triumphant praises the Lamb, and applies the price of her redemption with the effects thereof unto herself. Thus we ought so acknowledge the benefits of Christ, as to make them our own, not only in believing that he has redeemed others by his blood, “and made them kings and priests to God,” but ourselves also: for true justifying faith is accompanied with a certain persuasion of our own salvation: “I live,” says the Apostle, “by the faith of the son of God who loved me, and gave himself for me.”

Hence we observe two things: “First” that the death of Christ is truly a ransom satisfactory for our sins: and that our redemption by it, is not metaphorical (as the new “Samosatenians” blasphemously affirm) but proper: for the redemption which is made by a price is proper. But such is ours by Christ, because by the shedding of his blood, he has paid a full ransom, and satisfied the justice of God, as the Scripture witnesses Matt. 20:28. and 1 Tim. 2:6. being the same with what is here said, “that has redeemed us by thy blood:” and Chap. 1:5. “who has washed us in his blood,” and Heb. 1:3. “purged our sins by himself:” unless that by the word “redemption” is properly signified the whole work of our salvation: by “washing” and “purging” a part thereof, viz. our justification or sanctification. This place therefore and so many others, proving Christ’s satisfactory ransom, are to be apposed against “Socinian blasphemies.”

“Secondly,” that the redemption by Christ’s blood, is truly universal, as sufficient, and propounded not only to one nation, or a few, but to all nations, tongues and peoples: yet not so, as if all promiscuously should be saved: but those of every tribe, people and language, who believe in Christ. And this much the Elders teach us: “Thou have redeemed us of every tribe.”

…“And behold, and round about the throne”] The third apparition is of angels who sing “the new song” together with the beasts and Elders: for howsoever the Angels are not Redeemed by the blood of Christ, as men: yet in Christ they are gathered together into one, being subject unto him as the head of the Church, whereof they are members: and therefore they also praise the Lamb, as their Lord, and bless him in regard to the redemption of man-kind. David Pareus, A Commentary Upon the Divine Revelation of the Apostle and Evangelist, John (Amsterdam: Printed by C.P. Anno, 1644), 103 and 104.

5) The same benefit of redemption the Elders celebrate, Chap.5:9. “Thou has redeemed us to our God by thy blood.” And indeed this benefit we enjoy in this life: for now, as many as through faith, are “sealed” in the blood of the lamb, are redeemed; howbeit the fulness of our redemption is reserved to the life to come.

But are not all redeemed by Christ, died he not for all? Says not the Apostle Peter that he bought these “false prophets,” by whom he is denied? To this Augustine well answers, that all are said to be redeemed, according to the dignity of the price: which would suffice for the redemption of all men, if all by faith did receive the benefit offered. But as many as pass the time of their being in this life in infidelity, they remain unredeemed through their own fault. The sealed therefore are only redeemed, because they alone by faith receive the grace of redemption, through the grace of election, which God vouchsafed them (not to the others) from all eternity. David Pareus, A Commentary Upon the Divine Revelation of the Apostle and Evangelist, John (Amsterdam: Printed by C.P. Anno, 1644), 333-334.

Read the rest of this entry »