it is cleare that God is not bound to remunerate any creature but upon presupposition of his will for hee may convert him into nothing if it please him But if hee hath determined to reward them according to their obedience it must needs bee so for as much as the Divine nature is without variablenesse or shadow of change So likewise neither is God bound to punish any sinner for hee may pardon him if it please him but upon supposition that hee hath determined not to leave a sinner unpunished in this case onely is hee bound to punish Further I will shew that in such acts the condition whereof doth not depend upon the will of God the act may be of one condition and yet neverthelesse the purpose of God to performe such an act is of another condition As for example the act of creation is an act of Gods almighty power but Gods purpose to create the world is no act of power but of will rather So likewise Gods act of ordering all things unto their end in wonderfull manner is an act of infinite wisedome but his purpose to order all things in so admirable manner is no act of his wisedome but of his free-will Now I will demonstrate that the fore-sight of sinne cannot be the cause of Gods purpose to condemne For if it be the cause of Gods purpose then either by necessity of nature or by the free constitution of God not by necessity of nature for hee is naturally more prone as Piscator confesseth upon Exod. 24. 6. to remunerate obedience than to punish for sinne but no man will say that hee doth remunerate by necessity of nature therefore neither doth hee punish sinne by necessity of nature therefore it must be onely through the voluntary constitution of God that sinne is the cause of ordination unto condemnation But marke I pray the foule absurdity hereof for here-hence it followes that God did purpose that upon the fore-sight of sinne hee would purpose that men should be damned So that the purpose of God is made the object of his purpose and that upon a certaine condition whereas nothing can be the object of Gods purpose but some temporall thing or other and consequently one purpose of God shall be in time precedaneous to another purpose of God which is impossible first because no purpose of God begins in time secondly there is no priority between the purposes of God but priority of nature and reason and that onely in such a case as when one is of the end and the other of the meanes tending to that end which hath no place in this matter wee now treat of By the way when you say God cannot condemne the creature without sinne though hee may annihilate him what doe you meane by condemnation doe you take it for punishment If so then the formality of it expressed at full is this Affliction for sinne Now consider is it a sober speech to say God cannot afflict for sin without the presupposall of sin I doubt not but you deliver your mind of what God cannot do in the way of justice But it is utterly impossible that any man should bee afflicted for sinne without the presupposall of sin I presume your meaning is only this though incommodiously expressed God cannot excruciate or afflict a creature without the presupposall of sinne But in whom I doubt not but your meaning is in the person afflicted But what thinke you then of the Sonne of God how was hee afflicted and without any presupposall of sinne in him And I pray you tell mee hath not God as much power over us as over him Againe consider I pray what power doth God give unto man over inferiour creatures But let this passe Can God annihilate us without any respect to sinne and can hee not afflict us Alas what affliction would most men bee content to endure rather then to dye much more rather then to bee turned to the gulfe of nothing from whence wee came If it be said that God may afflict in some degree but not in the highest or for a time but not for ever such as wee conceive that torment to bee which wee signifie by the word Condemnation I pray remember wee are made after the image of God and endued with the light of reason and let us not cast our selves in a brutish manner upon conceits without all evidence of reason Now tell mee what reason can bee devised why God should bee able without all prejudice of his justice to inflict paine in one degree in two degrees in three or foure degrees in five six and seven degrees without all respect to sinne onely if in the eight degree hee should inflict it in this manner he should bee unjust Againe if without injustice hee may inflict paine on an innocent creature for a thousand yeares or ten thousand yeares or ten times ten thousand what reason why hee cannot afflict a creature for ever without injustice yet if no finite time can be set which hee cannot exceed why not for ever Nay if a creature should be put to his choyce whether he would choose to bee annihilated or to bee in eternall torment yet preserved without sinne which of these two would an holy creature make choyce of should he not preferre his being without sinne though in eternall torment before annihilation But let us consider the double act of God here devised about the world of mankind severed from the elect God you say did ordain to judge them according to their workes I pray consider who denyeth this even they that maintaine Reprobation as absolute as Election doe notwithstanding maintaine that God doth judge them no otherwise then according to their works for they doe not avouch that God doth ordaine to damne them for ought else then for sinne yea and that for sinne actuall as many as doe dye in actuall sin unrepented of and for originall sinne as many as doe dye only in originall sinne Againe will you deny the same forme of decree to have his course concerning the elect as well as concerning the Reprobate Doth not God reward them according to their workes I meane as many as live unto ripenesse of age for otherwise it cannot be verisied of the Reprobates And if God doth reward the righteous according to their workes did hee not also ordaine from everlasting so to reward them Neither is Election rightly stated and in congruous opposition unto Reprobation any other then Gods decree to reward men with everlasting life for their obedience of faith repentance and good works like as Reprobation is Gods decree to punish them with everlasting death for their continuance in sinne without repentance unto death albeit neither of these is Gods complete decree on either side but the decree of Election is Praeparatio gratiae gloriae as Austin saith that is a decree to give both the grace of obedience both in the way of faith repentance and good works and to crowne them with
moment of nature and reason will both prevent this inconvenience and also justifie Gods decree of condemnation to proceed upon the consideration of those sinnes for which hee purposeth to condemne them But then there is another point of great moment which in like manner must be accorded unto though you seeme to be little aware of it though I willingly confesse this over-sight is very generall namely that God decreeth the salvation of none of ripe yeares but upon or with a joynt consideration of their faith repentance and good workes For let us first make the decrees of salvation and condemnation matches As for example Reprobation as it is accounted the decree of condemnation is a decree of punishing with everlasting death Now if you will match Election unto this as it is the decree of salvation it must be conceived as a decree of rewarding with everlasting life Now let any man judge whether this decree must not as necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of faith repentance and good works in men of ripe years as the decree of condemnation or of punishing with everlasting death must be conjoyned with the consideration of those sinnes for which God purposeth to punish them And I will further demonstrate it thus Like as the decree of permitting some men to sinne and to continue therein to the end and Gods decree of condemning for sinne are joynt decrees neither afore nor after other and consequently the decree of condemning for sinne must necessarily be conjoyned with the consideration of sinne In like sort Gods decree of giving some faith repentance and good workes and his decree of rewarding them with everlasting life are joynt decrees neither of them afore or after other and consequently Gods decree of saving them and rewarding them with everlasting life is joyned with the consideration of their faith repentance and good workes Now that these are joynt decrees I prove thus First the decree of salvation cannot precede the decree of giving faith and repentance for if it should then salvation were the end of faith and repentance but salvation is not the end as I prove thus The end is such as doth necessarily bespeake the meanes tending thereunto but salvation doth not necessarily bespeake faith and repentance tending thereunto for God intending the salvation of Angels brought it to passe without faith and repentance as likewise the salvation of many an infant hee brings to passe without faith and repentance Secondly the end of Gods actions can be nothing but himselfe and his owne glory and therefore salvation it selfe must have for end the glory of God Now examine what glory of God is manifested in mans salvation and it will forth with appeare upon due examination that the glory of God manifested in mans salvation is such as whereunto not salvation only doth tend but diverse other things joyntly concurring with salvation thereunto As for example Gods glory manifested on the elect is in the highest degree of grace but in the way of mercie mixt with justice This requires permission of sin the sending of Christ to make satisfaction for sinne faith and repentance for Gods justice is seen partly in conferring salvation by way of reward and last of all salvation Out of all these results the glory of God in doing good to his creature in the highest degree of grace proceeding in the way of mercie mixt with justice Thirdly if God gave faith and repentance to this end to bring his elect unto salvation as to the end thereof then by just proportion of reason God should deny the gift of faith and repentance unto others that is to permit them finally to persevere in their sinners thereby to procure their condemnation as the end thereof which you will not affirme neither can it with any sobrietie be affirmed In the next place I will shew that neither can the decree of giving faith and repentance precede the decree of salvation for if it should then should faith repentance be the last in execution to wit if it were first in intention and consequently men should first be saved and afterwards have faith and repentance granted unto them Thus I have shewed my readinesse to concurre with you in opinion in this particular and that upon other grounds than yours and whose grounds are more sound yours or mine I am content to remit it to the judgement of any indifferent Reader As for your reason here mentioned repeating onely what you have formerly delivered as touching the will and good pleasure of God not for the death but for the life not onely of the elect but of all others also the vanitie of this assertion of yours I thinke I have sufficiently discovered And I wonder you should carry it thus not of the death but of the life when most an end you have carried it onely thus hitherunto that Gods willing their life is onely upon condition of their obedience and repentance not otherwise Or in a disjunct axiome thus Either of life in case they repent or of death in case they did not repent and what should move you to call this a willing to give them life and not to inflict death Why should you not rather call it a will to inflict death and not to give life considering that God was resolved to deny them such grace as would effectually bring them to obedience and repentance and to grant them only such a grace as he fore-knew full well would never bring them to obedience and repentance 1. Cain was of the familie of Adam to whom the promise was made concerning the seed of the woman that he should break the serpents head and although Cain was offered acceptance upon his repentance yet it followeth not that all were offered the same acceptance even those that never received any tidings or promise concerning the Messiah And the Apostle plainly signifies that the Gentiles were not admonished to repent untill Christ was preached unto them Act. 17. 30. But suppose it were so yet this hinders nothing at all the precedencie of the decree of condemnation unto the decree of giving such a Covenant and permitting them to dispise it For because God purposed to damne them for such a sinne therefore hee might decree to give them such a Covenant and permit them or expose them by leaving them destitute of his grace to the despising of it Not that I doe approve of any such conceit as before I have manifested but to shew how short your discourse falls of making good that which you undertake to prove And I am much deceived if you mistake not their tenet who make reprobation to proceed upon the consideration of the corrupt masle in Adam For undoubtedly their meaning hereupon is not to maintaine that God did purpose to condemne all reprobates only for the sin of Adam or for originall sinne drawne from him this were a very mad conceit But supposing that by Adams fall an impotency of doing that which is good is come upon
is to neglect the meanes And consequently to use the meanes aright was to doe accordingly as they were informed And indeed if they had done otherwise then they did they had not done so bad as they did I finde such giddinesse of discourse usually amongst the Arminians while they satisfie themselves with phrases never examining particularly the matter and substance of their own expressions Because of the abuse of these talents and meanes of grace God therefore doth deny to the men of this world such powerfull and gracious helpes as hee vouchsafeth freely to the Elect to draw them on effectually to repentance and salvation The Gentiles abusing the light of nature God gave them up to vile affections yea even to a reprobate minde The Pharisees because they employed the talent of their wealth unfaithfully God would not trust them with the true riches The Jews because they rejected Christ and his Word and his Messengers with scornfull and bitter malignity and brought forth grapes of gall and wormwood therefore God took his Word from them and hid from them the things that did belong unto their peace hee took the kingdome of God from them and gave them as a prey to sinne and misery and derision Psal 81. 11 12. What if none of the world as opposed to the Elect ever came to Christ or made such use of the means and helpes offered in him unto them as to obtaine salvation and regenerating grace by him yet might they have made better use of the means then they did which because they did not it was just with God to deny them greater means who thus abused the lesser In all this wee have as pure Arminianisme tendred unto us as could drop from the pen of Arminius himselfe or Corvinus Yet God forbid wee should co nomine for that cause dislike it It truth wee must embrace it though it come out of the mouth of the Devill If falshood wee shall by Gods grace disclaim it though it proceed out of the mouth of Angels of light and not disclaim it onely but disprove it also You may as well say that God doth not draw the men of this world effectually to Repentance because they doe abuse the talents and means of grace but this I disprove thus First if this bee the cause why God doth not draw them to repentance then this is the cause why hee sheweth not to them that mercy which hee doth to the Elect but this is not the cause thereof which I prove thus The meer pleasure of God is the cause therefore that is not The antecedent thus God shews mercy on whom hee will and hardens that is denies mercy to whom hee will If to harden were not to deny mercy it could not stand in opposition to shewing mercy The consequence I demonstrate thus If to deny mercy to whom hee will doth not inferre that mercy is not denyed according unto works then to shew mercy to whom hee will doth not inferre that mercy is not shewed according unto works Secondly if mens evil works were the cause why God denies them mercy then it could not bee said that God denies mercy because it is the pleasure of his will to deny it For if a reason bee demanded why a malefactor is hanged it were very absurd to answer that the reason is because it was the pleasure of the Magistrate to have him hanged Thirdly if evill works bee the deserving cause why Gods mercy is denyed unto men then either by necessity of nature or by constitution of God Not by necessity of nature in opposition to the constitution of God for then by necessity of nature God must bee compelled to deny mercy unto such what then shall become of Gods Elect unlesse you will say that their workes before mercy shewed them were not so bad as others which were equally to contradict both experience and the Word of God For in this case men should have mercy shewed on them according to their works to wit as they were found lesse evill then the works of others Nor by constitution of God For first shew mee any such constitution that men in such a condition of evill works shall bee denyed mercy Secondly by the same constitution mercy should bee denyed to the Elect also When you speak of the Gentiles in this case abusing the light of Nature and given over to vile affections you take your aime miserably amisse For the Gentiles are not the men of the world in opposition to the Elect. But God forbid that the Gentiles and the men of the world should bee terms convertible in this kinde for then what should become of us Certainly the number of Gods Elect is greater amongst the Gentiles then among the Jews and even of those that were given over to vile affections some were Elect as appears 1 Cor. 6. 9 10 11. And to say that the cause why God denies them mercy was because they abused the light of nature I have freshly disproved this and that evidently as I presume the intelligent Reader will observe though the contrary I confesse bee very plausible at the first sight and before wee come to the discussing of it Thirdly you take your aime amisse also though not in so great measure as in the former in the phrases For even of the Pharisees some were Elect witnesse holy Paul Who abused his zeale of the Law more foully then hee even to the persecuring of Gods Church yet was not the true treasure denyed to him and that in the highest measure And as for Reprobates if you think their unfaithfulnesse in the use of their wealth was the cause why mercy was denyed them for the disproofe hereof I refer mee to my former arguments Fourthly the very Elect of God not onely rejected Christ for a time but also crucifyed him That which you urge of Gods taking his word and Kingdom in plain terms the means of grace from such a Nation as contemns them is nothing to the purpose For wee treat of Gods shewing and denying mercy not in the means but as touching the grace it self of Repentance But this benefit you have confounded by comprehending both under the name of meanes and helpes for your advantage to passe from the one to the other as you see good Here indeed it is as true that because men doe make precious account of the means of grace therefore God continueth these means unto them like as because of mens perseverance in Faith and Repentance and good works God rewards them with everlasting life like as because men die in their sins therefore God inflicts on them everlasting death Onely with this difference Sin on the one side is the meritorious cause both of withdrawing the means of grace and of damnation but conscionable walking before God in the use of the means is only the disposing cause both to the continuance of the means and to eternall salvation For God by grace makes us meet partakers of
with death in case of disobedience I began to conceive that as the purpose of election was sutable to the Covenant of grace so sutable unto a Covenant of works must bee a purpose of retribution For how shall God covenant to retribute or recompence with life or death according to works if hee have no purpose at all of such retribution How shall the Covenant of works promise life upon condition of obedience if the purpose of reprobation have absolutely determined death upon all them within that Covenant without all respect of good or evill obedience or disobedience in any of them the grace of redemption offering the death of Christ and reaching forth some fruites thereof unto all as the promising and offering sufficient help to bring them to the knowledge of God and means of grace yea and sometime bestowing on them the participation of some excellent and common graces doth not make a third covenant partly of grace partly of works but bindeth such so much the more to keep the Covenants of works by how much the more helps and means God vouchsafeth them to keep it It is not the helps of grace offered or given that includeth men with in any part of the Covenant of grace but the condition whereupon it is offered or given Secondly if God offer grace and give though never so small even as a grain of Mustard-seed and promise to uphold it freely for Christ his sake and not according to our works it is a Covenant of Grace But if hee offer and give never so many gracious helps and means and gifts and uphold them according to the works of the creature it is still a Covenant of works as it was to the Angels that fell and to Adam though hee gave to both of them the whole Image of God and besides heaven it self to the one a Paradise to the other it is but the same covenant of works which God made with the world of mankinde after the fall and with Adam before the fall though Adam received greater means and helps to keep it then his posterity had after the fall Because still the condition of the Covenant was the same in both to reward them both according to their works So is it still but the same Covenant of works which God makes with mankinde when hee offereth them in Christ greater grace and helps to keep it then after the fall they could have attained unto without Christ because still the condition of the Covenant runneth in the same tenour to deal with them according to their works Neither doe I conceive any danger in the point though by this means obedience to Christ and walking worthy of him should bee commanded in the Law which is a covenant of works For if the infidelity and disobedience of the men of this world to the Gospel of Christ bee sin then are they also transgressors of the Law and then the contrary vertues are commanded in the Law Thirdly the Ceremonies of the Old Testament which were figures of Christ were commanded in the second precept of the Law was not Christ himself under those figures commanded also were they commanded to lay their hands on the sacrifices and not withall to lay their Faith on Christ were they commanded to look on the Brazen Serpent and not withall to behold Christ were they commanded to obey Moses and not withall the Prophet like unto Moses What then doe wee confound the Law and the Gospel God forbid The Law indeed commandeth to obey God in whatsoever hee had of old or in fulnesse of time should afterwards reveale to bee his will but it is one thing to command Christ to bee obeyed and revealed which after Christ is revealed even the Law also doth to all that heare it another thing it is to give Christ freely and faith to receive him and the spirit likewise to obey him yea and perseverance also notwithstanding our unworthinesse to continue in him all which the Gospel promiseth to the Elect of God Glory bee to God in Christ and peace upon Israel If the serious consideration of two convenants did turn the stream of your thoughts into this covenant it should seem you doe acknowledge a third covenant distinct from the former two Therefore I conceive there is an errour in the writing and that whereunto the stream of your thoughts was turned is not a different covenant from the former two but rather an opinion concerning reprobation different from that which is most generally received amongst our Divines And albeit hereupon you fell on this yet herehence it followeth not but that you might hereby fall upon laying a ground for three covenants ere you are aware Yet do I not charge you with this As in some respect you may seem to make three so in another respect you may seem to make but one if the covenant of retribution according unto works bee but one For I see no reason but Gods purpose of election may well passe for a purpose of retribution and consequently if the purpose of election and reprobation bee reduced unto one why may not the covenant of works and the covenant of grace by your rules bee reduced into one As election is Gods purpose to bestow everlasting life seeing God doth not purpose to bestow it but by way of reward of obedience of faith and repentance and good works it necessarily followeth that Gods election is his purpose of retribution But there is besides in election a purpose to work a certain number of men unto faith obedience and good works and unto a finall perseverance in them all So likewise between the covenant of the Law and the covenant of Grace there is this principall difference that God inables his elect to the performance of the one not of the other but as touching the reprobate hee inableth them to the performance of neither condition Subservient to Gods election of some is each covenant The covenant of works to humble them not onely upon the consideration of their sins whereby they have merited eternall death but especially upon consideration how their naturall corruption is so farre from being mastered and corrected by the Law as that on the contrary it is irritated and exasperated so much the more Then the covenant of grace to comfort them considering how the condition of life is adulced and tempered being from exact and strict obedience changed into faith and repentance but chiefely upon consideration that the word of this covenant is a word of power mastering their corruption and inabling to perform faith repentance and Evangelicall obedience in an acceptuble manner unto the Lord. Subservient to the purpose of reprobation may bee the Law only writen in mens hearts which very obscurely intimateth if at all any covenant made of everlasting life between God and man Where the word is revealed that in generall comprehending both Law and Gospel is subservient thereunto in the way of instruction and exhortation and the like thereby taking
Christs humiliation was the meanes of Christs advancement and I prove it Those only are to bee accounted meanes to such an end quorum ratio petitur a ratione finis designati that is the means are onely such as the nature of the end duly considered doth bespeake But the advancement of Christ doth not bespeake any such meanes for undoubtedly God could advance Christ without any such humiliation nay having taken his manhood into an hypostaticall union with his Son even in this respect his advancement was far more requisite than in respect of his humiliation You will say God purposed to advance him no other way then this I grant it and if you consider it well you shall find the reason of it by considering the right ends hereof in the counsell of God And these are different one was in respect of others to wit that he might be a fit Saviour of Gods elect not that their salvation was the end of his humiliation but the glory of God in a certain kind the end of both to wit both of his humiliation and our salvation namely the glory of his free grace in the way of mercy mixt with justice This end required satisfaction as without which it could not be procured But here I confesse the advancement of Christ hath no place but in another consideration it shall find place and that as a joynt meanes together with his humiliation for another kind of glory would God the Father manifest in Christ And indeed the Nation of mankind is as a glasse wherein a very complete body of Gods glory doth appear in very great variety and that was the manifestation of his glory in the way of remunerative justice in the highest degree remunerating obedience I say in the highest degree both in respect of the reward deserved and also in respect of the desert it selfe the reward being the sitting in the Throne of his Father and to have all judgment committed unto the Sonne the desert being the obedience of the Son of God one and the same God with his Father humbling himselfe to death even to the death of the crosse for the salvation of Gods elect But perhaps you may further say It is not necessary that the means should bee only such as the end doth naturally require For God could have brought man to salvation the same way he brought Angels without faith and repentance yea hee could have made them and immediatly have translated them into glory yet wee commonly say Faith and Repentance are the means of salvation I answer granting not onely that wee commonly say so but that wee truly say so in respect of our selves namely that as salvation is the scope and end wee aime at so faith and repentance are the onely meanes to bring us thereunto but in respect of God it is utterly untrue for neither is our salvation the end of Gods actions but his owne glory Hee made all things for himselfe Prov. 16. 4. And if it were his end hee could have brought it about divers other wayes besides this but in that hee brings it to passe this way there is good reason for it as wee shall well perceive if wee take the end of God aright namely to manifest his glory in doing good to man in the highest degree and that in the way of mercy mixt with justice This end doth necessarily require a permission of sin again it doth require satisfaction as by the death of Christ and thirdly it doth require faith and repentance that so hee may doe him good by way of reward and lastly a glorious salvation which is the doing of him good in the highest degree And as mans salvation is not the end of Gods actions so neither is the glory of Christ as hee is man the end of Gods actions for such a glory inherent can but bee a created glory and no created thing can be the end of Gods actions but onely God himselfe For as he is the chiefe efficient of all so must hee bee the supreme end of all and as hee is most lovely and most good so must hee necessarily love that most which is most lovely even himselfe and aime at his owne glory in all 2 Now I come to the Apostles Text wherewith this Argument is backt 1 Cor. 3. 22 23. All are yours and yee Christs and Christ Gods that is say you The world for the Church and the Church for Christ and Christ for God thereby giving us to understand That God first intended his glory for which are all things and then Christ for whom the Church is and then the Church for which the world is and then the world last of all But I pray you consider whether this Interpretation and Collection thereupon be not more superficiary than sound First when he saith All are yours is the world only to be understood by all Is not the world expresly named but as a member of this universall Are not Paul Apollos and Cephas also joyned with it together with life and death and things present and things to come and joyntly comprehended under the word all Verse 21. Let no man rejoyce in men for all things are yours Verse 22. Whether it be Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death whether they be things present or things to come even all are yours 23. And yee Christs and Christ Gods As he was perswaded Rom. 8. 38. That neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things to come 39. Nor heighth nor depth nor any other creature should bee able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord and therefore wee need not feare them So here he goes further and tells us that all are put as it were in subjection unto us to worke for our good and therefore wee should not rejoyce in them but rather in Christ and in God who hath wrought this and ordered all this for our good through the merits of Christ not only Apostles and Pastours but even the very Angels also who pitch their tent about us and have charge given them to keep us in all our wayes and all of them are sent forth for the good of them that are heires of salvation Yet this subjection is onely of a spirituall and gracious nature nothing prejudicing their advancement above them whom they thus serve in love and that for this their service performed for Gods sake to whom rather they are in subjection then unto us yet so farre in subjection to worke our good that it becomes us not to rejoyce in any of them but rather in God who hath thus ordered them for our good and Christ for whose sake they are thus ordered An Argument like to that the Lord useth Deut. 4. 19. Take heed lest thou lift up thine eyes to heaven and when thou seest the sunne and the moon and the starres with all the host of heaven shouldst bee driven to worship them
of disobedience and impenitency appeareth from Gods Oath As I live saith the Lord I have no pleasure in the wicked mans death but rather that hee should turne from his wickednesse and live The usuall answer made to this place seems to once to straine the word beyond his native simplicity 1. Some say that God speakes not of all the wicked but of some of the elect onely who in time are brought on to repentance but the truth is hee speaketh of such wicked men whereof some dye in their sinnes as is evident by the parallel place 2. Others say that God speaketh of his antecedent will going before all causes in the creature not of his consequent will following the creature in sinne but plaine it is hee speaketh of men now wicked defiled with originall and actuall sin 3. Others say againe God speakes not of the secret will of his good pleasure but of his revealed will but though I know there be sundry parts of Gods secret will which are not revealed yet I know no part of his will by oath doctrine or historicall narration that is discrepant from his secret will as all Object If you say Yes Gods revealed will is that all should repent Resp 1. I answer It is not a part of Gods will revealed by hath doctrine or historicall narration but by a word of command 2. I say it is a part of his secret will too I meane of his good pleasure that all men should repent and it is his displeasure if they repent not 3. But there is another part of his good will also that if they repent they shall not perish and this also revealed in his word And thus the will of God revealed in a distâ—â—â—â— axiome is alwayes consonant to his secret will and never frustrated 4. Finally others say that God delights not in the death of a sinner as it is the destruction of the creature but as it is a meanes of the manifestation of his justice I answer It is true but the manifestation of his justice stands as hee expresseth himselfe in the removall of the cause of their destruction from his owne will to their will As I live saith the Lord I desire not the death of a sinner Turne yee turne yee why will yee dye O house of Israel First here is some Philosophicall error in distinguishing betweene justice distributive and justice vindicative which are no more to be distinguished than a genus is to be distinguished from his species Justice commutative is only opposite to justice distributive but justice distributive comprehends under it as well justice vindicative as justice remunerative 2. Here wee have an anxious discourse to prove that which no man denyes as before hath been shewed And on the other side it is equally as true that God hath a willingnesse to glorifie his vindicative justice as well as remunerative to punish with death any one of his Elect upon condition of finall disobedience and impenitency as well as to reward with life upon condition of obedience and repentance 3. But it appeares by the Proofe that some further Point is intended then is yet manifested and such a one as you seeme rather to insinuate then expresse For whereas hitherto you have proposed a will of God onely conditionate the place of Scripture alledged mentions no such conditionate will which is indifferent to passe either upon the life or death of a man accordingly as hee shall be found to repent or not to repent but rather intimates a will of God inclining to affect rather the life of man then his death as it is manifested in these words I have no pleasure in the wicked mans death but rather that hee repent and live Now this is nothing congruous to a conditionate will as before premised First because a conditionate will at the best is but indifferent to passe either upon life or death according to the condition proposed Secondly if the condition of life be such as whereunto man is not so well disposed and the condition of death such as whereunto man is most prone it will follow here-hence that such a conditionate will is more propense to affect a mans death than life Thirdly most of all in case it be such as that the condition of life is never performed and the condition of death alwayes performed and the event hereof well knowne to God when hee made this conditionate decree 4. But whereas you would I guesse insinuate that God doth will the life of the wicked distinguished from Gods Elect rather then their death the place alledged is nothing to this purpose as not signifying what God doth rather will to come to passe but what God doth take most pleasure in when it doth come to passe whether it doth come to passe or no for certainly the life and repentance of the world doth never come to passe according to your opinion 5. Junius renders the place so as that Gods delight is signified to be placed in the repentance of a sinner Ne vivam fi delector morte improbi sed delector cum revertitur improbus ut vivat And indeed God is glorified by our obedience as whereby hee is acknowledged to be our supreme Lord not so by our disobedience And indeed did God take pleasure in the death of a sinner what should move him to wait for his repentance and use all perswasive meanes to bring him to repentance And it is proposed to take them off from a desperate condition proposed in these words Quia defectiones nostrae peccata nostra incumbunt nobis ideò ipsis nos tabescimus ecqui viveremus To take them off from this the Lord sends his Prophet charging him and saying Dic eis ne vivam ego dictum Domini si delector morte improbi sed cum revertitur improbus à via sua ut vivat Revertimini revertimini à viis vestris pessimis cur enim moreremini domus Israelis 6. Be it spoken in generall both of Elect and Reprobate yet onely is it directed to them to whom the Prophets of God are sent it followeth not that God doth will or desire the repentance of any Reprobate though to the confirmation hereof you chiefly tend certainly whosoever repents God takes pleasure in his repentance and the Scripture saith no more But that he doth not will it or desire it out of your owne mouth may bee convinced seeing that God affords not any Reprobate such an effectuall grace as hee fore-sees will bring them to repentance but reserving that for the Elect alone unto all others hee vouchsafeth onely such a grace as hee knowes full well will never bring any of them unto repentance And if God would bring any man unto repentance who should hinder him shall the will of man how doth it hinder him in working the repentance of his Elect cannot hee omnipotenti facilitate convertere as Austin speakes whom he will ex nolentibus volentes facere Againe doth God continue
to will their repentance after they are damned or no If no then is hee changed if ever hee willed their repentance 7. Certainly he speaks of men defiled with originall and actuall sinne for hee speakes of such whom he exhorts to repentance yet this hinders not but that it may proceed of his antecedent will for nothing but finall impenitency makes way for Gods consequent will concerning damnation 8. Saint Paul of all his labours tendred to the good of all sorts professeth that hee suffered them for Gods Elect How much more in Gods intention was the Ministry of his Prophets for the Elect sake The question is not so much about Gods delight in the death of the wicked as about his delight concerning their repentance and life and this hath no parallel Ezech. 18. applying it to other then Gods Elect. 9. The third Answer though it seemes to mee not congruous enough in respect of life because revealed will in this distinction is usually taken onely for Gods commandement and life is no precept yet is it congruous enough in respect of repentance for it is generally commanded and consequently Gods will of life if it be called his will revealed may be reduced to congruity as consequent to repentance which God commands to all and consequently hee may be said by his revealed will to will the salvation of all The Answer to this is nothing to purpose as sticking upon the termes secret and revealed and not applied to the usuall acceptions of this distinction which is onely to signifie Gods will of commandement which wee all know to be revealed and Gods will of purpose which mostly is not revealed 10. It is untrue that it is Gods good pleasure that all should repent for the will of Gods good pleasure in the acception of all that ever I read is onely of that which God will have come to passe and consequently of what shall come to passe not of what should come to passe to wit of mans duty that is generally accounted voluntas signi in distinction from voluntas beneplaciti and in speciall wee may call it voluntas praecepti and distinguish it from voluntas propositi this is What God will have to bee done that is what God will have to be our duty to doe And thus farre it may be accounted the will of Gods good pleasure as you call it But then Gods displeasure following hath no congruous opposition hereunto as when you say It is his displeasure if they repent not the contrary whereunto is not as you shape it It is his good pleasure that all men should repent but rather thus It is his good pleasure if they doe repent That distinction tends to meere confusion Neither yet doe I like this expression shaped never so congruously rather it should runne thus God is well pleased when men doe repent and most displeased when they doe not repent which is most true but least to the present purpose as touching the distinction ventilated betweene us concerning voluntas signi voluntas beneplaciti Your second instance of voluntas beneplaciti is no lesse extravagant as when you make the object thereof thus If they repent they shall not perish If they repent not they shall perish for promises and rewards are but adjuncts to voluntas signi and nothing secret but plainly revealed But to whom God will make his commandements back'd with promises and threats effectuall to the working of repentance this is a secret and this wee commonly account voluntas beneplaciti When you adde saying Thus the will of God revealed in a distinct axiome is alwayes consonant to his revealed will and never frustrated You continue still in a miserable confusion worse rather then better as when you talke of a disjunct axiome in reference to that which went before when no disjunct axiome at all went before but certaine conditionate axiomes as these If they repent they shall not perish If they repent not they shall perish whereas disjunct oppositions are such as these They shall repent or no They shall perish or no And to say such axiomes are consonant to Gods secret will is a wild expression whereas indeed they are neither consonant nor dissonant save onely in enuntiating that in an indeterminate manner which Gods will hath made determinate and in that respect it is dissonant enough Of the cause of the death of a sinner there needeth not to be any question for undoubtedly the sinne of man is the cause thereof in the way of a cause meritorious but not in the way of a cause naturally efficient And as undoubted it is that Gods will is the cause thereof as a Judge in the way of a cause naturally efficient but not in the way of a cause meritorious And as cleare it is that onely the meritorious cause is the chiefe cause in this kind for as much as by the rendring thereof alone satisfaction is made to him that demands the reason why such a one suffereth death But I wonder what you meane to change the former Translation of the Text thus I have no pleasure in the wicked mans death into another thus I will not the death of a sinner For is it not God that inflicteth death and doth hee not doe all things according to the counsell of his will Ephes 1. 11. Yet if it were so to be rendred it will nothing advantage you And in no other sense can it be said that hee doth not will it then in that in which hee is said not to punish willingly Lam. 3. according to the Latine phrase when hee doth not punish Animi causa but by reason of some provocation the sinne of man urging and moving him thereunto as is fairely intimated in that Hos 11. 8. How shall I give thee up Ephraim how shall I deliver thee Israel And Esay 3. They provoke the eyes of his glory For a second ground In the Covenant of Workes you may see as in a glasse what the purpose of God is in the manifesting his Justice upon the world of mankind as in the Covenant of Grace you may see as in a mirrour what the purpose of God is in manifesting his mercy upon the Elect For as it is in men renued after the Image of God so likewise it is in God himselfe Such as his Covenant or Promise is such is his Purpose God doth covenant and promise in the Covenant of Grace to give life to the Elect out of his grace in Christ So here doth God covenant and promise in the Covenant of Workes to give life to Adam and all his posterity if they continue in obedience of his Law or if breaking this Law they return again to him by repentance as it is described at large Gen. 4. 7. Levit. 18. 5. Ezek. 18. 5. 20. 11. 40. 21. Gal. 3. 12. Surely then the purpose of Gods just retribution is to give life to the world of mankind upon condition of their obedience or of their repentance
condition of obedience as is without all sinne then let your Position runne plainly thus Surely the purpose of Gods just retribution is to give life to the world of mankind upon condition of their being without sinne or of their repentance after obedience To this I answer That there never was any such Covenant of God with man I meane in such sort conditionate and consequently there never was any purpose in God to make any such Covenant with man at least for the time past As for the times to come let them speake for themselves by their owne experience when they come But that never any such Covenant had place hitherto between God and man it is manifest For since the Fall of Adam all being borne in sinne there is no place for such a Covenant as touching the first part of the condition which is of being without sinne And before the Fall of Adam there was no place for this Covenant as touching the latter part of the condition as I presume you will not deny onely the confusion of these two states before the Fall and after the Fall hath brought forth this wild conceit of such a Covenant By that which followeth it seemes that all these conceptions tend to no worse end then to justifie Gods disposition towards the Reprobate And it is great pity that so good an end as the justifying of God should bee brought about by no more congruous courses then these But I would faine know what blemish should redound to the nature of God if hee should intend nothing but death to the world of mankind yet your selfe will acknowledge that hee might have intended nothing but annihilation And is not annihilation as bad as death But your meaning is by death to understand sorrow And is there not just cause to preferre sorrow before death Yea but your meaning is of sorrow in the highest degree and that everlasting Why but if it be no blemish to God to intend nothing but sorrow in seven degrees to the world of mankind why should it be any blemish to him to intend nothing but sorrow in a degree more And if it be no blemish to God to intend nothing but sorrow to the world of mankind for millions of yeares why should it be any blemish to his reputation to intend to the world of mankind nothing but everlasting sorrow Yet whom doe you oppose in this Who ever said that God did intend nothing but death to the world of mankind those on whom you obtrude this conceit doe not affirme this of the world of mankind but onely of the Reprobates if they doe affirme any such thing And why I pray should the Reprobates be taken for the world of mankind rather than the Elect Neither doth any man say that God did intend nothing but death to the Reprobates Hee did intend to them all life as well as death but withall that all the posterity of Adam should be borne or at least conceived in sinne and also that many thousands should perish in that sinne wherein they were conceived and borne And I presume you dare not deny this which yet is the harshest proceeding of God above all others except his dealing with his owne Sonne As for others he intended to expose them to actuall sinnes of infidelity and impenitency by denying to them that grace which alone would preserve them from such sinnes as your selfe spare not to professe and yet for all this you would obtrude upon us a strange conceit and that as very reasonable namely That God did not intend their death onely but their life also whereas God is nothing at all advantaged hereby in his reputation but onely in words which is no reall reliefe to his honour but the adding of another injury if that bee an injury unto him as you conceive namely to mock him also And if wee shall nothing pleasure him by a lye lying for God as man doth for man to gratifie him surely wee shall doe him no pleasure by thus mocking him I would you had tried your strength in oppugning their opinion to the uttermost who maintaine God to carry himselfe as absolutely in the way of Reprobation as in the way of Election I would gladly have considered it But let us consider your present discourse First you say They were in Adam enabled to keep the condition therefore say not God intended nothing but death to them I pray transferre the case to the Angels were not they also enabled to keep the condition of life as well as their fellowes yet did not God grant his Elect Angels such a grace as whereby hee knew they would stand denying such a grace unto the others and that as absolutely as hee granted it unto the other And could hee not as absolutely have granted this grace unto them 〈…〉 and denyed it to them that stood And what would have 〈◊〉 the issue but quite contrary versis luxisset curia fatis Now let any man that is not possessed with a prejudicate conceit consider whether God did not as absolutely will the damnation of the one as the salvation of the other making the one amplius adjutos as Austin speakes then the other For the absolutenesse of Gods Election of Angels is seene by the absolutenesse of his giving them such a grace as to keep them from sinne And if hee doth as absolutely deny others the same grace as hee must needs for before the first sinne of Angels there could bee no cause moving God to deny them grace it will follow that their Reprobation was as absolute as the others Election Yet what a poore relieving of Gods reputation is this to say that Judas had power in Adam to keep the condition of life proposed to him though since his Fall hee hath not yet wee beleeve that Adam is saved who bereaved Judas of his ability and Judas damned for not keeping that whereunto hee had no ability and that through the Fall of Adam Further observe I pray you the miserable consequents of this your Argument as it runnes thus in few words In Adam we were enabled to keep the Condition Therefore say not that God intended nothing but death to the Reprobate By the same reason I may dispute thus In Adam they were enabled to breake the condition of life therefore Say not that God intended nothing but life to his Elect. But as hee intended salvation and not damnation onely to the Reprobates In like sort hee intended damnation and not salvation onely to the Elect Especially considering that not in Adam onely but in themselves also they are able enough to breake it and the best of them have that in them that deserves damnation nothing that deserves salvation As for the Reprobates there neither was nor is any thing in them that sits them for salvation It is strange that these incongruities should not bee discerned or being discerned men should be so little moved with them But these are dayes of vengeance and when a good
ability Dicere solet humana superbia saith Austin si scissem fecissem What was Pauls meaning when hee said of himselfe Rom. 7. 9. I once was alive without the Law I should think this impotency cannot be discerned without the life of grace For like as a dead man naturally is not sensible of his death so hee that is dead in sinne is nothing sensible of this his sinfull condition But howsoever surely grace revealed onely hath no congruity to such a worke as to bring a man to see his impotency for what greater grace in the kind of revelation then the word of God let this word testifie that a man is shaped in wickednesse and in sinne conceived and that hee is dead in sinne Is this sufficient to make him see his impotency Is the hearing of Gods word sufficient to make him beleeve it why then is it not sufficient to take away mens blindnesse and why then doth not every one that hears it cease to be blind and consequently cease to bee lame and deafe yea and cease to be dead also Nay which is more suppose a Physician discovers a man to be in a dangerous estate when hee dreames of nothing lesse and suppose the party beleeves it upon his word yet here-hence it followeth not that hee seeth the dangerous estate wherein hee is untill hee hath some feeling of it So likewise if hee should beleeve the word telling him that hee is unable to doe any thing that is good yet hee shall not be said to see it till hee hath some feeling of it and whence can this feeling proceed but from some principle of life that must be shed into his soule that hee may have a feeling of that miserable estate wherein hee is by nature otherwise though upon supposition hee should beleeve it in Gods word yet hee should not see it in himselfe Further you say It is sufficient to stirre him up to seek for help and strength and life in him where it is to bee found A strange conceit that a man should seek for life whereas if hee hath not life hee is dead and was it ever known that a dead man sought for life well Martha might seeke for the restoring of life to her dead brother Lazarus but surely Lazarus himselfe being dead neither did nor could seeke for life A man that hath life may be said to labour for life that is to hold it when hee is in danger of losing life but for a dead man to seeke for life is more then miraculous for it is utterly impossible When the Angell came downe into the Poole of Bethesda the poore Creple had never a whit the more sufficiency to enter in had his heart beene as lame to desire as his body to goe notwithstanding that he saw so good an opportunity hee should make no more haste to desire the benefit then his body could to enjoy it Againe no man seekes for that hee desires not neither can hee desire ought unlesse hee know it and loves it And is it possible that a man should know the precious nature of the life of grace and be in love with it and yet without the life of grace Is the knowledge of the precious nature of the state of grace and the love thereof a fruit of the flesh thinke you But by that which followes it seemes this is not your meaning but you suppose that notwithstanding all the operation of grace mentioned they may despise it In which case they neither love it nor understand the precious nature of it for no man despiseth that which hee loves and accounts precious Therefore this stirring up seemes to bee nothing but perswasion and exhortation Now this as Austin long agoe delivered Doctrinae generalitate comprehenditur and we willingly grant that the word preached doth equally exhort all that heare it to faith to repentance to prayer in some of which or in all which consists the seeking of life And no man makes question but the word of God sufficiently performes its part in exhortation to faith to repentance to prayer but the Pharisees despised this and so doe most and God is blamelesse But of any power that they have to beleeve repent and pray upon the doing whereof they should obtaine life your selfe are content to say nothing at all but keep your selfe unto generall phrases which are very apt to deceive us and this is the course not onely of them that are in love with their owne errors but with good men also when out of a desire to justifie God and not content with that simplicity of satisfaction which is laid forth unto us in holy Scripture and seemes harsh to flesh and bloud making them cry out Durus est hic sermo they shape unto themselves other courses more convenient as they thinke to give satisfaction yet not so much unto themselves as unto others but all in vaine for flesh and bloud will receive no satisfaction in the plaine truth of God A third Reason then to prove that God purposed life to the world upon condition of their obedience and repentance is taken from the end God aimed at As hee declares himselfe to offer meanes of salvation unto the world which is not in the first place to harden and to leave without excuse but to bring them to the knowledge of God and of themselves to repentance to the seeking after God to the purging of themselves from sinne and to peace To the Gentiles God gave the workes of Creation and Providence and his Law written in their hearts to reveale the knowledge of God to them to teach them to doe the things of the Law to judge of them that doe amisse and thereby be brought to condemne themselves doing the same things to lead them to repentance to move them to seek after the Lord. And thus much light Christ enlighteneth every man withall that cometh into this world From whence also it was that God vouchsafed heavenly dreames and visions even to the Gentiles That hee might withdraw them from their sinnes and hide their pride and save their soules from the pit But because this light alone did not prevaile with the Gentiles as to bring them to the knowledge of God in Christ therefore it pleased God in the fulnesse of time to send the preaching of the Gospel amongst them and in the meane time not to iudge them nor condemne them for their not beleeving in Christ of whom they had not heard nor for transgressing the Law of workes which they had not received but onely for sinning against the law of nature which was written in their hearts and expounded to them daily by the workes of Creation and Providence and sealed up to them by particular amplification partly by their Consciences accusing or excusing Rom. 2. 15. partly by dreames and visions Job 33. 15 16. To the Jewes God revealed his Covenant clearly and fully sent his Prophets among them early and late gave them deliverances chastened them with
heart out of their bowels and give them an heart of flesh when he resolves to afford this grace unto some but not unto others let every one judge hereby whether God can be said earnestly to desire the changing of their hearts when hee resolves to forbeare that course which alone can change them No no this discourse favoureth strongly of a conceit that it is in the power of an unregenerate man to change his owne heart and of an heart of stone to change it into an heart of flesh And in this case I confesse it were very probable that God should earnestly desire it provided that any ineffectuall and changeable desires were incident unto God That when God putteth forth the second act of positive retribution viz. the rejection of the world or decree of their condemnation God doth behold and consider the world especially men of riper yeares not in massa primitus corrupta nor as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience To prove this I need not produce other reasons then what I have formerly alledged in the fone-going Point for when God did expresse by his oath his will and good pleasure to be not for the death but life and conversion of sinners was it not after the fall of Adam and all his posterity in him then notwithstanding the presupposall of the fall God had not yet rejected the creature but as hee there declareth himselfe still retaineth and reserveth thoughts of peace towards them even a desire of their conversion unto life Againe with whom did the Lord enter into a Covenant of life and death upon condition of obedience and disobedience was it not with Adam onely and his posterity in his loynes in the state of innocency by the law written in their heart Was it not also after Adams fall renewed to all his posterity both Jewes and Gentiles Then yet God had not cast them away in the fall though the fall had justly deserved it but expecteth yet further to see how they will yet keep this renewed Covenant with him before hee cast them off as Reprobates Even Cain himselfe the eldest sonne of Reprobation is after the fall offered acceptance of Gods hand if hee doe well Moreover is it not after the fall that the Father by his workes of creation and providence judgements and mercies c. the Sonne by his enlightening the world by his death and ministery of his servants and the Holy Ghost by his calling and knocking at the hearts of the wicked doe all strive with men even to this very end to turne them to the Lord that iniquity may not be their destruction If therefore all the Persons in the Trinity doe provide severall helpfull meanes for the conversion and salvation of the world of the world I say now after the fall lying in wickednesse surely God did not then upon the fall reprobate the world unto eternall condemnation and perdition If you say God might well reprobate the world unto condemnation upon the fall and yet still after the fall usâ— meanes for their conversion and salvation because those meanes doe but further aggravate their condemnation I answer these doe indeed further aggravate their condemnation but it is but by accident onely by their neglect and abuse of them but the proper end which God himselfe of himselfe aimes at in the use of these meanes himselfe plainly expresseth it to be not the aggravation or procurement of their condemnation but the restoring of them to salvation and life as hath been before declared So then to draw all to an head the summe of this first reason is If God after the fall doe retaine a will and purpose to restore life to the world upon an equall condition then hee did not upon the fall or upon the onely consideration of the fall reject the world of the ungodly unto their utter perdition But you see God retaineth after the fall an holy will and purpose of restoring life unto the world upon an equall condition as appeareth by his Oath by his Covenant and by his Workes therefore the conclusion which is the point in hand is evident I marvell what you meane to call Gods decree of condemnation his act of retribution retribution being an act temporall and transient the decree of God is an act immanent and eternall And therefore it is not so handsomely said to be the putting forth of an act for so much as it is immanent and not transient 'T is manifest I confesse that sin is alwayes precedent to the retribution of punishment as it is without controversie that sinne neither is nor can be antecedent to Gods decree sinne being temporall but all Gods decrees eternall And I have found it by experience to be an usuall course with our Adversaries to confound condemnation with the decree of condemnation And Junius himselfe very incongruously in my judgement calls this decree Praedamnatio to make the fairer place as I guesse for sins praecedencie thereunto at least in consideration But no necessity urgeth us to any such course and wee may well maintaine that God in this decree of condemnation hath alwayes the consideration of that sinne for which hee purposeth to damne them for undoubtedly hee decrees to condemne no man but for sinne It is impossible it should be otherwise condemnation in the notion thereof formally including sinne But I like not your expressions in the distinction you make saying God considers men in this sinne not as newly fallen in Adam but as voluntarily falling off you mean long after by some act of carelesse and wilfull disobedience When God made this decree they were not newly that is a little before fallen in Adam for that fall in Adam was temporall but the decrees of God are eternall And to consider as newly fallen when as yet they were not much lesse were they fallen is not so much to consider as to erre or feigne But like as God decreed to suffer all to fall in Adam and many also to continue both therein and in bringing forth the bitter fruits thereof even untill death so he purposed to condemne them for those sinnes but take heed you doe not make an order of prius and posterius between these decrees lest either you make the decree of condemnation precedent to the decree of permission of those sinnes for which they shall be condemned which will be directly contradictory to your Tenet here or making Gods decree of permitting such sinnes for which they shall be condemned precedent to his decree of condemnation whereunto you doe encline unawares which will cast you upon miserable inconveniences and that by your owne rule already delivered for if the decree of permitting sinne be first in intention then by the rules received by you it should be last in execution that is men should be condemned for sinne before they be permitted to sinne But the conjunction of these decrees into one as in the same
but one thing though expressed under different phrases What is this to the purpose Say they are not condemned till then I say nor then neither 1. Unlesse they continue finally therein for were not the very Elect sometimes strangers and enemies Rom. 5-10 Col. 1. 12. Be it so hatred of the light goeth before condemnation therfore the consideration of this hatred goes before Gods purpose to condemne them If this Logick likes you like this also Faith repentance and good workes goe before salvation therefore they are before Gods purpose to save them whom he saves But wheras you seeme to denote that after a certaine continuance in hatred of the light a mans case is desperate which you seeme to signifie by a phrase of shutting up besides that it is nothing at all to the present purpose but matter of another question I shall beleeve it when I finde your selfe or any man else to prove it In the meane time I continue as I am and rest contented with the reasons formerly mentioned for the disproving of it Undoubtedly by the seed of the serpent cannot be meant all men fallen and corrupted in Adam by originall sinne for they are expresly proposed in opposition to the seed of the woman Gen. 3. 15. Herein I concurre with you but I concurre not with you in the description of the seed of the serpent for that agrees to all even to the Elect as well as to the Reprobate before the time comes that God hath appointed for their effectuall calling for till then they have the Image of the old serpent as you call it stamped upon them for they are in blindnesse of minde and hardnesse of heart which undoubtedly are the chiefe workes of the devill which Christ came into the world to loose Their will is to doe the lusts of the devill for the devill workes in them and being taken in his snare they are led captive by him to doe his will yea Paul himselfe had an hatred of the light and loved darknesse above it But assure your selfe no hatred of the light except it be finall is the cause why our Saviour shuts any man under condemnation I verily thought with my selfe saith St. Paul that I ought to doe many contrary things against the name of Jesus of Nazareth 10. Which things I also did in Jerusalem for many of the Saints did I shut up in prison having received authoritie from the chiefe Priests and when they were put to death I gave my voice against them 11. And I punished them oft in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme and being excedingly mad against them I persecuted them even unto strange Cities I see no reason why the prophaneness of Esau should stand in greater opposition unto grace then the zeale of Paul while he was a persecuter Esau intreated Jacob kindly in his returne from Mesopotamia but Esau continued finally in his prophanenesse Paul continued not in the course of his blind persecuting zeale and this puts the true difference between them Though with God there was a difference put between them from everlasting in his counsels to make the one a vessell of mercy the other a vessell of wrath And I see no reason why the reprobates should not be accounted the seed of the serpent from their first conception not because of their originall pollution for that is common to them with Gods Elect but because God doth not purpose to cure it in them as hee will cure it in the Elect though this naturall corruption cannot break forth into actuall hatred of the truth till they were brought acquainted with it and the like actuall hatred breakes forth also in Gods Elect as it did in Paul untill the time comes which God hath appointed for the curing of it But hee will never cure it in the Reprobate Against the point I know nothing of worth besides that in the Rom. interpreted and opened in the answere to the fourth Doubt following save onely that place in Jude where it is said of the false teachers as it is commonly translated that they were ordained of old to condemnation The words in the originall are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense whereof is given to be that these false teachers were of old ordained to judgement viz. As they take it from eternitie and so before themselves were or had given any former cause of such condemnation and according to this sense the subject whereabouts the decree of reprobation is conversant is not the world as fallen in Adam much lesse as fallen from Christ but as considered in massa pura before they had done good or evil yea before they were To cleare this objection I am to crave leave to depart from the usuall translation and interpretation of this place For first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not in the first place signifie condemnation but as you well know judgement rather And so if I should give the sense they were of old ordained to judgement viz. according to their workes this would not at all touch the second act of positive Reprobation the point now in hand but only confirme the first point touching the former act of positive Retribution spoken of before viz. before the world was God then ordained the men of this world to judgment according to their works And surely I should have rested in this sense but that I see the Apostle Jude interposing the Pronounc◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth thereby point at some spirituall kind of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or judgement spoken of by him in the wordes before v. 3. Hee thought it needfull to exhort them to contend earnestly for the faith once given to the Saints In the v. 4. Hee rendreth a just reason hereof from the antagonists which were crept in amongst them and whom God himselfe as the chiefe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had designed and sent amongst them to put them to this contention and tryall For so the coherence requires this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be here translated for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coming of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies decerno dimico to contend in law or warre and then judico and last of all condemno doth first signifie lis or certamen contention or tryall and then judgement and at the last hand condemnation Thus Paul takes this word in the first sense with Jude here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for suits or tryalls or contentions There is utterly saith hee a fault amongst you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that you have contentions or suits or tryalls one with another If you take the primitive sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and also consider the coherence of the Apostles words in this place this will appeare to bee his native and true meaning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were of old designed to this contention Yet for a little further clearing of the text let me adde a word touching the sense of the other two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
confesse this course of justifying a tenet by the usefulnesse of it is usually much made of by the Arminians but I could never brooke it in any This is a faire way to make a rule of faith unto our selves and under colour of usefulnesse to shape the doctrine of the Gospel after our owne fancies yet I am willing to examine what here you deliver also in every particular 1. As touching the first Use I finde you serve your turne with a manifest confusion of the grace of vocation with the grace of salvation Thus God of free grace saves in the one in justice damnes in the other But the comparison you make is nothing congruous For it is so carried by you as if in this dealing of God the case were alike with mans dealing as when a Judge amongst many malefactors equally guiltie of death saves some and damnes others These are nothing equall for the one die in faith and repentance the other die void of faith and in the state of impenitency Therefore to help this incongruitie you will be driven to fly to effectuall vocation And indeed before God doth effectually call some by such a grace as he denies others they whom hee cals were no better then others But let us make way for the truth to appeare in her proper colours by distinguishing those things which ought to be distinguished lest wee be found to be in love with our owne errours As touching Vocation 1. we acknowledge with you and you with us the freenesse of Gods efficacious grace bestowed on some and denyed to others and herein magnified that whereas God might have bestowed it on others and not on them he hath bestowed it on them and not on others yea on them who are but few in comparison permitting a farre greater multitude of others and which is especially to be considered though you are not willing to take notice of it Like as God hath mercy on some in giving them this efficacious grace we speak of meerely according to the good pleasure of his owne will so he hardens others denying them the same grace and that meerely according to the good pleasure of his owne will And thus the freenesse of his grace is magnified towards the elect by his severitie and freenesse of his will in denying it unto others whereas you so carry it as if the freenesse of his grace to the one were magnified in respect of his justice toward the world of mankinde in dealing with them according to their workes which is a plausible speech and of common course usually admitted but utterly void of truth The truth being this That like as God in inflicting damnation on men doth not proceed according to the meer pleasure of his own will but according to the works of men so in denying grace efficacious he doth not proceed according to the workes of men but meerely according to the good pleasure of his owne will For the Apostle plainely professeth in this case that looke how he hath mercie on whom hee will so likewise he hardens whom hee will And to cleare the truth in this point because as many as vary from the truth of God in this point are not very prone to heare on this eare let us consider that justice hath different acceptions In a common notion it is no otherwise taken then for justitia condecentiae as the Schoolemen call it Thus whatsoever God doth is an act of Gods justice whether it be an act of power as in makeing the world out of nothing or an act of liberalitie in doing good to the creature without cause or an act of mercy in pardoning sin all these are acts of justice in this sense The meaning whereof is no more but this In all these actions God doth no other thing then what himselfe hath lawfull power to doe In this sense it is just with God as well to have mercy on whom he will as to harden whom hee will And so your comparison here made should have no life at all to that purpose whereunto you accommodate it For in this sense the justice of God shall equally appeare on both sides Whereas you make the freenesse of Gods grace only on the one side to be magnified the more by the consideration of his justice which hath course on the other So that to hold up your owne comparison as decently proposed you must be driven to forgoe this common notion of justice and sticke to a more strict and peculiar notion thereof and that is when God rewards or punisheth men according to their workes Now I say that God doth not deny efficacious grace to any man according to his workes which I demonstrate thus The execution of justice in this kinde doth alwayes proceed according to some law which law is made to man by some superior power but unto God not by any superior power for hee acknowledgeth no superior power but by his owne will As for example Wherefore doth God crowne all them with glory who die in faith and in repentance To wit because he hath ordained and made a law that whosoever continueth to the end in the state of faith and repentance shall be saved Againe why doth God damne them to everlasting fire who die in sinne void of faith void of repentance To wit because God hath ordained and made a law that whosoever beleeveth not provided that he continueth in unbeliefe unto the end shall be damned For undoubtedly God could have turned men into nothing had it so pleased him and had hee not decreed the contrary like as hee brought men out of nothing Now shew me that God hath ordained or made a law that men found in such or such a condition shall be denyed efficacious grace if you cannot shew any such ordinance or law of God then doe not say that God in denying grace proceeds according to mens workes in justice And indeed if any such law could be assigned it would follow that in the communicating of grace also God should proceed not according to the good pleasure of his will but in justice according to mens workes Consider a second argument What is sinne originall but the spirituall death of the soule By Regeneration man formerly dead in sinne is revived Now is it congruous to say that because man is dead in sinne therefore it is just with God not to revive him Because a man is blind therefore it is just with God not to open his eyes Or because he is deafe therefore it is just with God not to open his eares Suppose sin were but the sicknesse of the soule is it congruous to say that because a man is sicke therefore it is just with God not to cure him Whereas it is manifest that unlesse a man were first sicke it were impossible to cure him unlesse first blinde or deafe it were impossible to restore sight or hearing unto him unlesse first dead it were utterly impossible to revive him Come wee now to salvation and
most dangerous tending manifestly to the utter overthrow of the Freenesse of Gods grace in Predestination which indeed very frequently you shake in this unhappy discourse of yours As God in fulnesse of time doth administer and dispence the wayes of his providence so you say bee decreed to dispence them in the same manner from all eternity Wee grant it willingly but what of all this you adde that in dispencing the performance of the Covenant of workes the Lord punisheth and rewardeth the creature according to the condition of obedience or disobedience performed by it or rather by the persons under it This also wee willingly grant But what doe you inferre herehence onely this Therefore surely hee decreed to carry such workes of his providence upon the same conditions Now this conclusion we embrace as readily as your selfe but this is farre from justifying the decree of God to bee conditionall Nay your selfe doe plainly expresse that the carriage of such workes of his providence is upon such conditions Not that Gods decree is upon such conditions which is as much as to say in plaine termes that the execution of his decree proceeds upon condition not the decree it selfe Yet I confesse in the same manner Arminius himselfe and his followers discourse as if they would explicate themselves in this manner of argumentation Sinne alwayes goes before damnation therefore a respect to sinne goes before Gods decree of damnation As if wee should argue thus Faith in men of ripe yeares alwayes goeth before salvation therefore a respect unto faith alwayes goeth before Gods decree of salvation Doe you not perceive by this the dangerous issue of your argumentation yet this is the very thing they aime at this is the Helena they are enamoured with But I am confident you are farre from this and would not a little grieve to understand that the Orthodox faith of some in the very point of predestination is not a little shaken by such argumentations as these And the rather because they have found such an eminent man as your selfe not onely to swallow them but in a confidentiary manner to propose them as most sound to give satisfaction unto others Therefore Aquinas fairely distinguisheth of the cause or condition of Gods will either quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing or quoad res volitas as touching the things willed no cause or condition thereof quoad actum volentis there may be quoad res volitas As for example to give instance in predestination no cause thereof at all quod actum praedestinantis as touching the act of God predestinating there may be a cause thereof quoad res praedestinatione praeparatas as touching the things prepared by predestination As for example Grace may bee and is the cause of glory and Christs merits may be and are the cause of grace So of Reprobation no cause thereof at all quoad actum reprobantis as touching the act of God reprobating no more then of the will of God quoad actum volentis as touching the act of God willing But there is a came thereof quoad res reprobatione praeparatas as touching the things prepared by Reprobation as sin is the cause of condemnation And indeed many confound these and thereupon professe the will of God in some cases to bee conditionall the issue whereof is no more then this That some things which God will have to come to passe shall not come to passe but upon on condition Thus Vossius understands voluntas conditionata a conditionate will which hee attributeth unto God not considering how handsomely he contradicts himself And Doctor Jackson of Providence discoursing of voluntas antecedens consequens will antecedent and consequent premiseth that the distinction is to be understood non quoad actum vokntis not touching the act of God willing but quoad ves volitas as touching the things willed though his discourse hereupon bee nothing suitable A manifest evidence that hee understood not the distinction any more then Uossius did You are willing to acknowledge that Gods decree of delivering Christ to death was absolute as a work of meere grace As for the condition of Adams fall to bee premised to this decree sure I am that is not your Opinion neither doth it become any to maintaine any decree of God to be both unconditionall and conditionall And why that sinne more then any other for which Christ satisfied should be imagined to bee premised as a condition of this decree I see no reason and if every sin must bee presupposed why not the sin of crucifying Christ This sin started Arminius and this is it and this alone which he thinkee good to except in this case I doe nothing wonder that his learning and his honesty were so well met both of a very temperate nature But albeit the fall of Adam was not preconceived to this decree of delivering of Christ to death yet I am not of your Opinion who thinke hereupon that the decree of sending Christ into the world was before the decree of permitting Adams fall concerning which I have discoursed enough while I examined how well you cleared the first doubt But when you distinguish of Gods decree to deliver Christ to death and to deliver him to a sinfull death you take a course to make mad work amongst Gods decrees As if God did first intend the generality of a thing and not till after the foresight of somewhat else intend the specialty thereof I will not tell you how undecent a course School-men conceive it to bee to attribute decrees to God of things indefinite I never found any Arminian take such a course Philosophy hath taught us duplicem ordinem naturae a double order of nature as namely nature generantis naturae intendentis in generation and intention And albeit secundùm naturam generantem communia generalia are priora specialibus in generation things common and generall are before their specialls According as a man in generation prius vivit vitam plantae first lives the life of a plant then vitam animalis the life of an Animal Lastly vitam hominis the life of a man yet quoad naturam intendentem as touching the intention the order is quite contrary that the more specialls as more perfect are first in intention And whereas intentio rerum gerendarum the intention of things to be done is for the production of things in existence and it is well known that generals can not exist but in specials nor specials exist but in particulars it is very strange that God should first intend to produce a Genius and after intend the specialty seeing nothing can bee produced but in particular You may as well say that God did first intend that Christ should die but whether a natural or violent death that was at first undetermined Secondly that God determined hee should die a violent death but whether by a judiciall proceeding or extrajudiciall that as yet was left undetermined And
see whether this might not bee extended further also But let us examine it by your owne rules the best course to present before your eyes the strangenesse of these conceptions Three things are to bee considered as ordered by you one after another First Gods absolute decree to deliver Christ to death Secondly the foresight of mens corrupt dispositions Thirdly Gods decree to deliver Christ to death by the sins of men Now mens sinfull dispositions depending partly upon originall sin derived unto all from the sinne of Adam partly upon mens former actuall conversations as also upon Gods permission of it to continue uncured and uncorrected it followeth herehence that the foresight of these sinfull dispositions did presupose both that God purposed to permit Adams fall as also to bring these men forth into the world in originall sinne as also to permit their former actuall sins wherby they arrive to these vitious habits together with his purpose to deny grace whereby these vitious habits should bee corrected Before all these decrees was the decree of delivering Christ to death by certain sins of certain men according to your Opinion in this place Whence it followeth that the delivering of Christ to death by the sins of men being last in intention must bee first in execution to wit before Adam was suffered to fall or they suffered by an evill conversation to arise to so corrupt dispositions or God denyed them grace to correct such corrupt dispositions And though Christs suffering death in a speciall manner to wit by the sins of men were to bee first in execution yet Christs suffering death in generall and in an indefinite manner was to bee last in execution And this argumentation of mine throughout depends meerly upon your own rules delivered in clearing the first doubt But passe wee over these scrupulosities The course you take to explicate Gods providence in punishing sin with sin is nothing congruous to the examples thereof set down in holy Scripture For whereas Judas his betraying of Christ was a fruit of his covetousnesse you make Gods giving him over to the committing of this sin to bee the punishment of his covetousnesse Likewise whereas the High Priests and Pharisees conspiracy against Christ was a fruite of their envy for Pilate knew that for envy they had delivered him and of their ambition as appeareth Joh. 11. 48. you make Gods giving them over to the committing of this sin to bee the punishment of their ambition and envy In like sort that Pilate gave judgement against Christ being a fruit of his popularity and worldly feare of Caesar the giving of him over to the committing of this sin you make to bee the punishment of his popularity and worldly feare of Caesar So the Jews crying out against him being a fruite of their ignorance and infidelity the giving them over unto this sin you make it to bee the punishment of their ignorance and infidelity Now shew mee any example throughout the book of God in punishing sin with sin answerable unto this As if God did punish mens sinfull dispositions by giving them over to bring forth the proper and congruous fruites of those sinfull dispositions Rom. 1. Wee read God gave the Gentiles over into a reprobate minde to doe things inconvenient to commit horrible uncleanenesse But God hereby punished not the unclean disposition the fruites whereof were brought forth by Gods giving them over into a reprobate minde but hereby God punished their Idolatry 2 Thess 2. 20. Wee read of Gods giving men over to illusions to beleeve lies hereby hee did not punish their infidelity the fruite whereof was the beleeving lies but hereby hee punished their want of love to Gods truth So when God sent an evill spirit between Abimelech and the men of Sechem to set them together by the eares hee did not hereby punish their mutuall hatred one against another but rather their joynt conspiracy against the sons of Jerubbaal I doe not deny but it may bee said as Austin saith that God hath ordained Ut omnis inordinatus animus paena sit sibi That every inordinate minde should bee a punishment to it self but in my judgement it is a strange liberty of speech to say that God doth punish a man for his covetousnesse by not restraining it but suffering it to have his course What you mean by giving Judas over to betray Christ I know not Gods providence operative in evill is of an obscure nature You speak of obduration and of giving over unto sin but wherein it consists you explicate not Yet by declining these phrases you forsake the point in question Which is not at this present whether God gave Judas over to the betraying of Christ but whether hee decreed hee should betray him and the Priests conspire against him and the people preferre Barabbas before him and Pilate condemn him Which because you not directly deny the Question is transferred to the manner of this decree as namely whether it bee absolute or conditionall You will have it to bee conditionall to wit upon the presupposall of Judas his covetousnesse Yet this you doe not in plain terms expresse as indeed you seldome set down your meaning plainly giving your self too much liberty in speaking at large which is no way conducing to the investigation of truth but a sore impediment rather Having said that it is without warrant to say that the sinfull manner of Christs death was decreed by God by an unconditionall decree presupposing no condition in the creatures which were the wicked instruments of his death Whereas hereupon you should shew upon presupposall of what condition in Judas in the Priests in Pilate God decreed that Judas should betray him the Priests deliver him to Pilate and Pilate condemn him you decline this and in a new phrase tell us that it was the punishment of Judas his covetousnesse and hypocrisie that God gave him up to betray Christ and in like manner you speak of the rest Leaving to your Reader to expiscate your direct meaning and to explicate that which you involve It seems your meaning is that upon the foresight of Judas his covetousnesse and hypocrisie God decreed hee should betray him Now let us discusse this If God did in this manner decree it then certainly upon the covetousnesse of Judas hee brought this to passe Now I demand by what course of providence God brought it to passe that Judas betrayed him you say it was by giving him over to betray him Now what you mean by this I know not neither doe you expresse but I will indevour to explain it First I presume your meaning is God did not restrain his covetousnesse for this seems to bee the meaning of this phrase Psal 81. where it is said God gave them over to their own hearts lusts and by way of explication it is added And let them follow their own inventions Now this course of providence was not sufficient to bring it to passe that Judas should betray