In vol. 2 of Durham on Revelation which I've started doing some pre prep work on, I ran down a reference to Dallie's view of universal extent of Christ's death and frankly have no recollection how I determined this in a large Latin work. I usually have a post to PB or FB or an email. What Durham wrote is below. The page I have referenced is at this link. Anyone able to confirm this is likely the spot? I may have convinced myself due to the Gal. 2 reference. See the note for why there is a question (no page is give).
A third absurdity is, that this does extend Christ’s death further and makes it more common than the scripture does. For in scripture, Christ is said to die for His People (Matt. 1:21), for His Sheep (John 10:11, 15), to gather the sons of God (John 11:52), for His own (John 17:6 with 19), and such like. And in this place, it is said to be for some of all kindreds, tongues, and nations, and not for all indifferently. Now, according to this opinion, Christ may be said not only to die for His sheep, but for all and every man, etc. There are two special objections against this; the first is that although Christ be said to die for His sheep, and to have redeemed some out of every nation, etc.; yet says a late learned abettor of this opinion (to wit, Dalleus in his Apology),[1] that it will not follow, because He died for these; therefore He died for no other; more than it will follow from Paul’s word, Galatians 2:20, He loved me, and gave Himself for me; therefore He did love and gave Himself for no other. It is sad, that learned men should so please themselves to shift arguments.
[1]In the first edition there is a blank left several words in length for a reference of some sort that was not filled in, which blank was only omitted in the 1799 edition, yet with still no reference data. The reference is to Jean Daille, Apologia Pro duabus Ecclesiarum in Gallia Protestantium Synodis, 2 volumes (1655), 2.1024.
