and means appointed of God for that end and one would think that this man were a little of my mind in this by what falleth from him in the close of this second Argument using these words at least for the moving of God to elect Sir If here where you make mention of any Instrumental cause you intend onely the Instrumental means of salvation then I joyne with you for as I have before asserted That as God hath decreed the end so likewise hath he decreed the means conducing to that end But as there is no external cause at all and therefore none Instrumental for which he doth elect before all time but all arising from within himself even his own love and good pleasure so when that decree comes to be put into execution in time then there are subordinate causes but all set on work by the first cause which is God himself but not as to election but all as tending to salvation And therefore that fell very advisedly from me when I said at least for the moving of God to elect where I place a vast difference between election and salvation God elects without respect had to faith works or use of means as to the decree but yet he saves with by and through faith works and use of means as in respect of the end 2 Thes 2.13 1 Pet. 1.2 You pack up these your fardles of exceptions thus Now if he do not hold that it is some cause by which men come to be more peculiarly interessed into the favour of God by believing then they are without believing why did he not rather say it must not be accounted any cause at all upon any account whatsoever But it is that which the Lord Christ hath said in Ioh. 16.27 which perswadeth me to be of that mind in that he hath said the Father himself loveth you because you have loved me and have believed that I came out from God and therefore If I should say that loving of Jesus Christ and believing in him were no cause at all by which we came to be chosen into the Fathers love I should sin against Christ in speaking contrary to his word But this is more then was in the Position and yet it is no more then truth Answ Sir now I will give you an account why I used that expression at least for the moving of God to elect my meaning was not that any man came to be interested into the first favour and love of God which is the good pleasure of his will immanent and eternal in himself more by believing then without believing For in election God lookt upon men as sinners enemies ungodly in their blood in a doleful plight and the objects of pity and compassion and not as on believers And therefore my words carried this sense that though there were no cause or motive at all why he should elect one rather then another because all were in an equally lost condition yet in the decree of election wherein there was a love unto and a purpose to save some he likewise decreed to save them by such means which in his wisdome he had ordained to be suitable for the attaining of the end so that salvation should have adequate causes for the effecting of it viz. faith works and use of means though election it self had none but singly and simply the love of God arising onely out of his own bosome And therefore it excluded causes as to election but did admit of causes as to the accomplishment of salvation For the rest of this paragraph of yours it trips up the heeles of all the former your seeming fair concessions and plainly discovers the secret guile and fraud of your heart For now you begin to speak plain enough saying If I should say believing were no cause at all by which we come to be chosen into the Fathers love I should sin against Christ Here indeed is plain dealing though all along before you have juggled with me and denyed all causes as to election And this indeed though you are not aware of it moâ—lders to nothing all your former exceptions which have still denied all causes motives c. And now you grant loving and believing to be causes and confirms every argument that I have raised and fortifies every of those absurdities that I have charged upon you as following upon your position to any of which you make not the least appearance of an answer But I tell you as before God in electing lookt upon men as in the corrupt mass and lumpe of perdition regarding nothing what they could be as of themselves for they must unavoidably be in a lost condition till by his own act transient flowing from that of Immanent in himself he made them believers by giving of them faith and all of this for the greater advance of his own free grace which he did not do to others For that place of Ioh. 16.27 brought to confirm their purpose I answer that the love of God hath a two-fold acception The first is amor benevolentiae which is the foundation and fountain of all the good his people have and receive t is the wombe that conceives and sends forth all the good things we do enjoy of which Ier. 31.3 I have loved thee with an everlasting love and so 1 Ioh. 4.10 we love him because he loved us first and of this no cause or reason can be rendred besides the good pleasure of his will The second is amor complacentiae when in time the Lord is delighted with the persons of those that he loved from eternity Ezek. 16.14 thy beauty was perfect through the comeliness I put upon thee Cant. 3.1 Behold thou art fair c. and thus the Lord crowns rewards and delights himself in those graces given to his elect ones and of this love of complacency is this text to be understood and not of the everlasting love spoken of Ier. 31.3 in electing of us before all time and whereof onely this controversie is And now gather up altogether and make up your accounts and see to what an excrescency of advantage your numerous exceptions against my arguments will amount unto and you shall find that the Summa totalis will be just o Hitherto have we fayled in that still river the streams whereof shall make glad the city of God Psal 46.4 Psal 87.7 Rom. 11.33 and from whence all our springs flow viz. Gods electing of us to life eternal But now we are to lanch into that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that unfathomable gulfe of the wisdom and knowledge of God whose judgements are unsearchable and his waies past finding out viz. that of non-election or Reprobation Concerning which this Gentlemans Position did assert this viz. That God saw some men rejecting the means of salvation continuing in sin and unbelief yet haply not without the exact form of godliness but denying the power those he reprobated to everlasting destruction from the foundation of the world But In
though the ill digesting and composing of them will not deserve a Schollars eye much less answer yet because if it be possible that the Authour may not further befool himself or further delude his over credulous proselytes and lead captive 2 Tim. 3.6 silly women laden with sin I will draw a line of confutation over his more remarkable Errors and willingly pass by his smaller faults of incongruous or improper expressions First I do consent that the most holy and high God from all not in Eternity by one sole and single act did see all whatsoever he purposed to do or permitted to be done by any of the creatures he intended to create for else he could not be Omniscient Omnipresent Infinite and Eternal But whereas it is said That God saw some men embracing the means of salvation and those he elected in Christ from the foundation of the world to everlasting life this is so far from soundness that it is flat Pelagianism an old Heresie exploded forth of the Church for many ages since by which it must be concluded that the eternal decree of Gods unchangeable election must be dependent on the intervention of mans liberty of willing and working but no proof from Scripture brought to evidence it nor appearance of any colour of reason Whereas the Scripture when it speaks of election makes it to be altogether independent on the creature or from ought at all wrought by or in the creature but wholly resting for the ground thereof in the bosome and holy will of God himself and therefore it is called Ephes 1.5 the good pleasure of his will and Ephes 1.11 the purpose and counsel of his will Nay so absolute and irrelative is this decree of election from any thing out of God besides his good pleasure as to be any motive or incentive for which God elects as a meritorius or a procuring ground or cause of it that even Christ himself is excluded as for whose merit man should be elected and therefore we are said to be elected in Christ not for Christ But because Socratical discourses are not so convincing I shall produce some irrefragable Arguments to which if the adverse party shall give any the least colour of answer to satisfaction then I shall say as they believe that learning is good for nothing but to puffe men up and gull the world but till that be done which I am certain will never be I shall bless the God of my salvation who Ephes 4.8 11. hath given such gifts unto men 1. Arg. If the rise of our election be grounded in the free grace of God then it is not upon Gods foresight of mans embracing of the means of salvation but it is founded on the meer mercy and free grace of God therefore not upon the foresight of the embracing of the means The first proposition or major is unquestionable for that there is but one cause to produce the effect The second proposition or minor viz. that our election is founded on the meer mercy and free grace of God see for proof hereof Deut. 7.7 8. The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself the Lord did not set his love upon or choose you because you were more in number c. but because the Lord loved you where the single love of God is pitcht upon as the cause of their election exclusively from any other outward causes See further Deut. 10.15 Matth. 20.15.21 Luk. 12.22 Rom. 9.11 18 21. Ephes 1.5 11. 2 Tim. 1.9 2. Arg. If the Patriarch Iacob was elected meerly out of grace without any respect had to any of his faith works or use of means then all others are likewise so elected for there is the one alike motive for the election of all as of one But Iacob was elected meerly out of the good will of God without any respect to faith works or the use of means at least for the moving of God to elect him Therefore all others are so likewise elected The minor proposition is confirmed out of Rom. 9.11 for the children being not yet born neither having done any good or evil that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of him that calleth It was said the elder shall serve the younger 3. Arg. If the decree of election be absolute without any respect had to faith works or means Then God did not elect upon a foresight of the embracing of the means but the decree of election is absolute c. Therefore See for proof Rom. 9.11 Rom. 11.5 6 7. Ephes 1.4 5 11. Matth. 20.16 and 22.14 4. Arg. If faith and works be the fruits and effects of election then they are no wayes causes of it for which God should elect but they are fruits and effects Acts 13.48 as many as were ordained unto life believed Ephes 2.4 7 8 9 13. 5. Arg. If our foreseen faith works or embracing of the means were the cause of our election they should be likewise the cause of our vocation and justification but the later is false therefore the first The major is proved by that undeniable axiome Quicquid est causa causae est causa etiam causati That which is the cause of a cause is also a cause of the thing caused i. e. of the effect The minor is proved 2 Tim. 1.9 and Ephes 2.8 Rom. 3.24 justified freely by his grace 6. Arg. If our election were dependent on mans embracing of the means then these absurdities would follow 1. Then the will of God should be moved and determined by an external cause i. e. the first cause should be ordered and guided by the second and thereby the first is made the second cause and e contra which is against the rules of all Philosophy and Divinity 2. God hereby is supposed to be capable of passion i.e. when thus moved but God is altogether immutable and impassible 3. Then there should be somewhat in the creature out of God before greater and better then God because that every cause is before and better then the effect 4. If there might be imagined to be any thing in the creature which might move God to the decreeing or appointing of this or that then it would follow that the actings or issues of things have not a dependence upon the decree of God contrary to Iam. 3.37 5. Then man might have just cause of boasting in himself 6. What then would become of children dying in infancy before they had the use of faith or works or any embracing of the means and which never were to have a being to act therefore they were never to be foreseen For the third Position That God saw some men rejecting the means of salvation continuing in sin and unbelief those he reprobated to everlasting destruction But this hath the like unsoundness in it as the former of election there being no other ground or reason assigned for it either of sin or unbelief or rejecting of the means
because he loved him less than he did Iacob Gen. 29.31 Thus Leah was said to be hated by Iacob comparatively with the love shewed to Rachel because she was less beloved then Rachel so he that serves two masters will hate the one and love the other i. e. will love him less then the other And thus God loves the reprobates less than he doth the elect but it cannot hence be concluded that the Lord doth absolutely hate any creature of his own making â—en 1.31 for they were all good yea very good and Wisd 11.24 thou lovest all things that are and abhorrest nothing that thou hast made T is true God hates sin because he made it not and this hatred hath an influx upon the sinner as he is a sinner because God made him not so But God hates not a non-elected person or a reprobate as he is a reprobate neither doth he condemne him or decree to condemne him for his negative reprobation which is Gods act Isa 55.8 but for his sin which is mans act Secondly I say that this hatred in God his wayes not being like our waies is not to be considered as to hold proportion with the passions and affections of men in their hatred For this confusion or indistinct consideration or comparison of divine things with humane is that great witchcraft that puts such a stumbling-bloâ—k in the way to the knowledge of things that we cannot discover the truth thereof with so discerning an eye as otherwise we might And therefore though I do attribute hatred to God yet that hatred in God anteceding reprobation or which is assigned as a cause of reprobation is nothing else but Gods absolute will of denying that special benefit of effectual grace and infallible direction unto eternal life and permitting some men by their own defective freewill deservedly to fall under the misery of eternal death And therefore in some sort I may say that the hatred of God is as much visible and doth as sensibly discover it self in the denyal of effectual grace as in the inflicting of the torments of hell For God the Father wounded bruised tormented the soul of his dear Son for our sins without any diminution of his love unto him But he never denied him effectual grace whereby he had an immunity from sin And therefore say some It is more desirable to have the benefit of effectual grace whereby we are preserved safe in the love of God than to obtain an immunity from the torments of hell Christ was not exempted from this last though he was never excluded from the former Thirdly I would here distinguish of the hatred of God as it signifies in him first his affection or secondly his effection if I may use such a word or otherwise the effects of his affection though I do confess that these affections as of love hatred anger c. are not properly in God but are attributable to him ex anthropopathia by similitude and resemblance First for the hatred of God as it is an affection so it doth precede Reprobation it being the will and purpose of God to deny grace to such whom he will not elect which is that whith we call reprobation Secondly the hatred of God as it signifies an effect to wit the execution of that hatred anger wrath inflicted on sinners and so it follows reprobation To summe up all in a few words that God bare less love to his creature Esau then to Iacob is manifest That that lesser degree of love which he bare to Esau may comparatively to that manifested to Iacob be called hatred That God may deny some grace to one that he bestowes upon another without injustice that equall grace is not given to Esau as to Iacob That those who from the love of God are not elected by a necessary consequence must be reprobated or not elected Ephes 1.4 5 6 7. 2.4 5. or loved with a lesser love The love of God was the cause of our election and therefore the lesser love or hatred the cause of our reprobation And now Sir if you peruse this what I have here said you may easily answer your own frivolous question And yet I must withal tell you that though I do affirm that God reprobated Esau or did not elect him onely because he would not it was not the good pleasure of his will so to do or it was his wil absolute not to do it that he denied that favour to him that he shewed to Iacob and so may be said to hate him without any external cause lookt upon as in Esau why he should be reprobated rather than Iacob neither of them having done either good or evil yet there was an internal cause of the hatred or reprobation namely the good pleasure of Gods most holy will for the manifestation of his own glory in his power and justice And therefore God cannot without blasphemy be compared to the envious Jews who howsoever they hated the man Christ Jesus without a cause yet God had a cause motive or incentive from within himself even the manifestation of his own glory in shewing his power and justice on those so reprobated which glory of his is more precious and to be prefered before the saving and preserving from the torments of hell the persons of all both men and Angels and yet withal I say that the vindictive punishment of God or positive reprobation which is Gods appointing to torments and hatred of God as it is an effect of the former is never inflicted without a just and meritorious cause viz. the sin of man And thus much to what you answer to the first objection to the second you write thus To the second I have already shewed that Paul directed his words to the Jew who rested in the law and made his boast of God and was confident that he was in the way of God and thence it was that he said thou wilt say unto me who hath resisted his will But Paul had more than the single term sin to assigne as a cause of their being reprobated blinded or broken off from their own olive-tree to wit a continuance in sin and unbelief and rejecting the means of salvation when the hands of the Lord were stretched forth unto them all the day long and yet they were a disobedient and gainsaying people Answ To this I have already answered pag. 115. that the words were directed to the Gentiles to which I refer the Reader And whereas afterwards you say that Paul had more then that single term to assigne as a cause of their being reprobated blinded broken off c. to wit a continuance in sin and unbelief and rejecting the means of salvation Sir this is but gratis dictum you onely say but cannot prove it shew me any such expression in this whole chapter wherein this text alledged lies yea or any where else in all the Scripture It is true those words of yours of the Lords hands stretched
the same consideration and capacity people under one relation and qualification such who are nearly related as fighting under one Captain sheep fed under one shepherd 2 Cor. 6.14 1 Cor. 12.13 knit together by one bond of the spirit joyned together in one Communion of Saints for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness c. By one spirit baptized into one body having one Lord one Faith one Baptism c. Now of what sort and condition of men can this be spoken but only of the elect of those that have do or shall beleeve And thus this our Prophet an elect person a beleever speaks all this Chapter over of himself with other Elect and beleeving persons And lest you should say it is true that beleevers are included and yet are not unbeleevers excluded I shall prove and that only out of this Chapter that hereby is meant all beleevers and only beleevers or at least those that have did or shall beleeve Arg. 1. I draw from v. 5. The chastisement of our peace was upon him i.e. his chastisement procured our peace whence I argue thus That chastisement for sin that was laid upon the person of Jesus Christ procured peace for them for whom he was so chastised But there was no peace procured for the Reprobates or those who should never beleeve Isa 57.21 There is no peace to the wicked Eph. 3.14 He is our peace Ergo. Arg. 2. From v. 5. By his stripes we are healed whence I reason thus The stripes inflicted on Jesus Christ are intended and do become healing medicines for them for whom they are inflicted but they never become healing medicines for the Reprobates or unbeleevers Nahum 3 9. There is no healing of their bruise Ergo. Arg. 3. From v. 6. All we like sheep have gone c. whence I ground If in all the whole Scripture by sheep are understood the Elect and Beleevers then so it should be here but the former is true Ergo for either sheep or goats Arg. 4. From v. 8. For the transgression of my people was he stricken whence I raise this Those for whom Christ was stricken were in Gods account his own people But the Reprobates were never in Gods account his own people Mat. 7.25 I never knew you Ergo. Arg. 5. From v. 10. He shall see his seed whence I bottome this That which Christ had as a wages or reward for the making of his soule an offering for sin was a peculiar seed His seed Isa 65.23 The seed of the blessed of the Lord Genesis 3. The seed of the woman and not of the Serpent Mal. 2.15 A godly seed now the Reprobates are not of this seed Ergo. Arg. 6. From v. 12. He bare the sins of many All this Chapter hitherto the Prophet hath used words of the first person Ours Us We and to these he attributes the universall Particle All including with himself all beleevers But now when he comes to the third person he only speaks of Many so that hence it is plain that Christ as a Redeemer bare the sins of many of the universall world and that he is a Redeemer of all the elect or beleeving world So that it is undoubtedly true that not only this Text but this whole Chapter makes most mainly for me against your self It is a bad omen of ill success in a mans business when at the very first onset a mans supposed best friends should fly in his own face and fight against him The second in the list is Psal 145.8 9. The Lord is Gracious and full of compassion slow to anger and of great mercy The Lord is good to all and his tender mercies are over all his works Answ Those of the former ver 8. are some of the Divine attributes wherein there is neither difficulty nor question And for the former part of ver 9. that the Lord is good to all There is no doubt but that the Lords goodness hath and doth shew it self to all the work of the creation they being all Good yea very Good But the great knot sticks in these two things Gen. 2. 1. how far all his works may be extended and 2. unto what tender mercies must be limited First If you insist upon the terme of universality all and so labour to extend it to the Reprobates as well as the Elect Then by the same reason you may extend it as well unto the Devils they being likewise the work of his hands as the Reprobates are and where the Text doth not distinguish neither should you And truly I must acknowledge that even the Devils themselves do in some degree partake of Gods tender mercies They have in them a kind of goodness for ens bonum convertuntur Their nature and essence is good as Gods workmanship t is onely sin which is their own and none of Gods making that renders them evil and so hateful to God and man Is it not a tender mercy to have a native excellency beyond all the rest of the creatures Christ and the elect Angels onely excepted to have such spiritual substances equal in their nature and creation to the holy Angels themselves and through the dexterity and agility of those natures to be able to understand so far and to do so much as being permitted therein the parts and gifts of all the men in the world are not to be weighed in the ballance with them yea and withal to have that excellency so many ages past to be preserved and delivered notwithstanding their daily sinning and provoking the most High And according to this rule of tender mercies I confess there is a great bulke of tender mercies manifest to the Reprobates Act. 17.28 Psal 145.15 Wisd 11.24 25. Matth. 5.45 Eccle. 9 2â— In God we live move and have our being The eyes of all wait upon thee and thou givest them their meat in due season Thou lovest all the things that are and abhorrest nothing which thou hast made c. He makes his Sun to rise on the evil and on the good c. and all things come alike to all But Secondly if by tender mercies you will understand such mercies as concern eternal life and salvation as effectual vocation justification adoption sanctification c. then I deny that thesâ— are over all his works Deus diligit omnes homines in quantum vult aliquid bonum non tamen quodcunque bonum vult omnibus though God is good to all and his mercy is over all his works yet he extends not the top and height of all his bowels of compassion and his inmost tenderest mercies to every mothers Son there hâ—â— reserveth for his own chosen people those whom in Jesus Chrisâ— he hath before all time elected to eternal salvation And more then this you can never draw out of this fountain of love pump whiles you will not enough I am sure to establish that Chimaera of theirs an universal Redemption That Third in the rank is Iohn 3.16
17. God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life for God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him might be saved Answ That God doth put forth acts of Grace of free and undeserved love unto his worthless creatures we have willingly acknowledged we further say that that love of God is no passion not proper affection in God who is not capable of such but onely a purpose in God of willing well and doing well unto the creature and that out of the wel-spring of that love did slow that good pleasure of his of the sending of his Son into the world But that either it was the purpose of God in sending or the intention of Christ in coming into the world to be a Redeemer of all and every particular person or to offer himself a sacrifice for all this text doth not evinâ—e Yet I say that this love here spoken of may be said to be universal in respect of the Elect and of believing persons answerable to that Rom. 3.22 Rom. 3.22 The righteousness of God which is of faith of Iesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe and yet withall particular in respect of the whole mass and lump of mankind according to that Rom. 9.13 Rom. 9.13 Iacob have I loved and Esau have I hated and ver 18. he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy and whom he will he hardeneth Neither doth Christ intend any other universality here then this mentioned first because that those for whom Christ came into the world are also saved for what shall be able to hinder his purpose or resist his will Secondly because believers onely are saved Rom. 8.19 Phil. 1.2 Mat. 13.11 and shall not be condemned onely to the Elect it is given that they shall believe Phil. 1.29 Matth. 13.11 And thirdly to what purpose was this pretended love and affection in God if it never did nor can take any gracious effect in saving any reprobate That which takes the fourth place is Rom. 5.18 As by the offence of one judgement came upon all men to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life Answ That by All men unto whom did slow the benefit purchased by Christ is not meant of all and singular men absolutely but all men that did appertain unto him who were given him of the Father i. e. the elect and believers For the Apostle here makes a comparison between the first Adam and the second Adam as being two roots either of whom do communicate unto their several branches i. e. unto a certain company descending from them what they have do or shall enjoy and therefore saith that as the first Adam by his carnal generation did communicate two pestilent evils Sin and Death unto all descending from him So Christ the second Adam by his spiritual generation did communicate two contrary blessings viz. Righteousness and Life to all that did believe in him The truth of this interpretation is clear from the scope of the Apostle which is to compare Christ the Authour of Righteousness and Life with Adam the Authour of Sin and Death from ver 12. to the end of the Chapter and therefore hereupon ver 19. repeating the same matter which in probability should be more clear the word all is interpreted by many For had it been otherwise the Apostle would have pulled down what before he had built up and clearly contradicted himself in that doctrine which he had before delivered in the third and fourth Chapters therein asserting the justification onely of believers and therefore here is but little advantage to be gotten from this Antithesis But you will say if more perished in Adam then are saved in Christ his Grace then should be weaker then Adams sin where is then the much more abounding grace spoken of ver 17. To which I answer that the greatness and power of grace above â—n ought not to be esteemed according to the multitude of those that are condemned in Adam and of those that are justified and glorified in Christ for so Grace should be equal onely and nothing at all stronger then sin if every of these should be made righteous in Christ as many as were born sinners in Adam But herein consists the extensiveness of Grace beyond what sin did First in that whereas sin brought forth death and grace righteousness and life now it s well known t is easier to destroy and condemn an innumerable company then to quicken and save one single person all the world compacted together could not save one but Adams single sin could make obnoxious the whole world Secondly In Adam all the whole world are involved and made liable to condemnation by his one only offence but Christ doth emancipate his little flock not onely from that one original sin contracted by stain and imputation but likewise from all actual sins wherein they themselves are personally culpable neither is there any Righteousness besides Christ as there be some sins besides the sin of Adam And how mighty is this gift which innumerable sinners cannot withstand and this is that which the Apostle hinteth ver 17. and not as c. And so I proceed to your fifth Text prest to give in evidence which is 2 Cor. 5.14 15. For the love of Christ constraineth us because we thus judge that if one died for all then were all dead and that he died for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him which dyed for them and rose again True it is Christ is said here that he died for all but for what all therein lies the doubt truly then the resolve must be that Christ died first for those all to whom his death is imputed viz. such who through the virtue and efficacy of the death of Christ which he underwent for them are accounted as dead and secondly Rom. 13.14 for such as do repent i. e. whereas before they did indulge their pleasures and lived to the satisfying of the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof now they live no longer to themselves but do endeavour to live conformably to the will and honour of him that died for them Now whether this can be extended to any but believers let my adversary judge for it were blasphemy to think that Christ could not obtain the end of his death had it been intended by him for any else besides believers yea even those to whom he had purposed to give them power to believe and to become sons of God The sixth Text forced by you to give its vote is 1 Tim. 2.1 c. I exhort therefore that first of all supplications prayers intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men for Kings and for all that are in authority that we may lead a quiet and
be to all people for unto you is given this day in the city of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord. This was the first Sermon that was preached of God incarnate of Christ Immanuel God with us wherein the universal particle All doth not signifie all and singular the elect and Reprobate but onely all and singular of those for whom Christ was born to be a Saviour as appears by these words Mat. 1.21 Mat. 1.21 where the Angel saith with a limitation He shall save his people from their sins Therefore by all people must necessarily be understood oâ— all believing people noâ— of the Jews onely but of the Gentileâ— also Besides we find it otherwise that this joy was not communicated to all and singular some there were that had no portioâ— in it Mat. 2.3 because Matth. 2.3 when Herod heard hereof he was troubled and all Ierusalem with him and Pro. 14.10 tells us that the strangers intermeddle not with this joy Mich. 4.11 And thus having thrown down all your strong holds wherein you trusted as to the support of that notion of Universal Redemption I proceed to that other denyed by you viz. the Baptizing of Infants wherein you say there is neither precept nor president of the sprinkling or washing of Infants in his name Suppose now that I should tell you that what as to the proof of an ordinance of Christ here is not sufficient enumeratio partium for a thing may be at the appointment of Jesus Christ yet neither express precept nor exact practise for it standing upon record I pray Sir tell me if you can what precept have you in the letter of the word or practise hanging on the file for the change of the seventh day Sabbath for the abrogation of the one or substitution of the other in its stead No Sir we have a greater and yet warrantable latitude in our probates of divine Injunctions that if a thing can be proved by a necessary and undeniable consequence it will equipend with either precept or president I could give Instances 1 Cor. 11.16 but that is bootless at this time 1 Cor. 11.16 We have no such custome neither the Churches of Christ is a good Argument with the Apostle negatively We have such a custome and so have the Churches of Christ is as good an argument with us affirmatively yea even now since the times of the Apostle But lest that you should take this rather as a tergiversation than an answer I will apply my self more particularly to say some what as to satisfaction And 1. That there is a command extant Mat. 28.29 Of Baptizing all the members of the Church whereof children are a part the promises appertaining to them as well as to those of years Acts 2.39 If you look for a special command and shall deny that Infants are comprehended under that general command because they cannot be taught I must tell you that whosoever proposeth a thing in general terms he doth thereby comprehend all specials unless he make a particular exception and whatsoever is and hath been of a perpetuated and continued right and use in the Church of Christ once established viz. that the covenant of God should be sealed upon the covenanters there will be no need of any repetition of any sort or condition of persons who they are or should be that are intended to be those covenanters And yet truly Sir in my judgement if you were well put to it you would find more difficulty in your baptizing of Infants And for the qualification you require of these which are to be Baptized that is appliable to the primitive Church which was gathered of persons of ripe years and as in reference to such they were first to be taught before Baptized But for Infants who follow the condition of their parents the promises appertaining to the parents being entayled to the children another course is had And as to matter of president we have examples for the Baptism of whole families Acts 16.45 33. and 1 Cor. 1.16 out of which Infants cannot be excluded shew me else when and where and upon what grounds that priviledge that Infants formerly had was reversed and repealed and then you will say somewhat And yet if this will not satisfie I will put you one argument to boot Arg. To whomsoever God is pleased to be a God in covenant and to make a covenant-promise those are to be Baptized by the command of Christ But to the Infants of those which are in covenant God hath been pleased to express himself to be in covenant and to make covenant-promises unto them Therefore such Infants are to be Baptized by the command of Christ Both the propositions are confirmed out of Acts 2. The Major from ver 38. and 39. compared together Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the name of Iesus Christ for the promise is made to you and to your children The minor proposition is likewise proved from ver 39. for the promise is made to your children But because that the strength of the Argument may more evidently appear I will annex somewhat for Illustration of the text 1. There is set down the command of being baptized Be Baptized every one of you 2. There is added a reason of the command for which is not to be restrained to the last words in the former verse of receiving the gifts of the holy Ghost promised in Ioel but of all other gracious blessings of the Covenant which will appear by comparing of those places Acts 3.25 Gen. 17.7 Ier. 31.33 3. There is the subject receiving the promise which is amplified by a distribution where to the parents are joyned children indefinitely without any manner of difference either of sex or age 4. Both of them viz. Parents and Children their receiving into the Covenant of Grace is most clearly to be gathered from the first Covenant entred into with Abraham the father of the faithful whether of Jews or Gentiles ratified from Rom. 4.10 11. Where the Infants are accounted in the same condition with the Parents and the males were circumcised the eighth day Gen. 17.10 11. And therefore likewise in the New Testament the Infants of Christians are to be esteemed in the condition of their Christian Parents they are sanctified in them 1 Cor. 7.14 and therefore with them are to be baptized More I have written on this subject and committed it to some of your friends to reading which if you desire to peruse no question you may have the view of it but in the mean time do you chew the cud upon this Having done with these impertinencies to the business in contest between us you proceed to Revolters of whom you wrote thus But that some who have been professors of the truth have withdrawn themselves from the same it is evident and proved Traytors thereunto as did Iudas for love of mony and as Demas to imbrace this present world yea some have been so far
corrupted with covetous practises in these our dayes that they have forsaken the right way and are gone astray following the way of Baalam the son of Bosar who loved the wages of unrighteousness for some have withdrawn themselves from the truth that they might be partakers with you in their tithes and offerings and some also have been led away by the temptations of Satan and good is the word of the Lord which hath said Acts 20.30 that of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them But it may be as truly said that Jesus is not the Christ because one of his ministers left him and betrayed him as it can be said that this is not the way of Christ because some turn from it and prove traytors thereunto Answ I shall agree with you that the deserting of an opinion which a man formerly did maintain or the declining the society of such with whom before he held fellowship is no infallible Argument either of the unsoundness of such an opinion or insufferableness of such a society Yet withal I must tell you when I see a man taking as it were a lap at the opinions of any one sect tanquam canis ad Nilum and so would that and so goes on to another sect and after to another as by woful experience we have found in our daies that such unfixed men never set a period to themselves in their innovating of their opinions but by a lamentable gradation jumpe from one to another and so they may ad insinitum and this methinks should be an evident sign to me that such Positions and societies were somewhat unsavoury The like do I say for matter of division of which thus you write neither is the division which you talk of amongst the servants of Christ any safe argument to conclude that therefore they are not the servants of Christ for such things have fallen out amongst those that have been called saints and p ecious in the sight of God in that some have been and are weak and some are strong and so as there are degrees of knowledge amongst the Saints it doth oâ—casion some difference as it hath formerly done do we not find that even two of the Apostles to wit Paul and Barnabas Acts 15.39 men that truly feared God were at some difference when the men of Ephesus that were Idolaters can ry all with one voyce Acts 19.34 Great is Diana of the Ephesians Answ I yield you all But when I see the Anabaptists divided amongst themselves and thei opinions so inconsistent one with anothers as it might be easily inâ—â—anced by those interfering confessions and positions of those of Chard Islington and those of yours but all of them joyntly so destructive to publick peace I may probably conâ—ecture that iâ— is a shrewd prognostick that their Kingdom is not long to continue For that which you say further and whereas you say that they have left their Conventicles to be gulled and deluded by the dregs of men c. I must tell you that those dregs of men as you are pleased disdainfully and in scorn to call them will prove to be those 1 Cor. 1.27 28. foolish things of the world which God hath chosen to confound the wise and weak things of the world to confound the mighty and base things of the world and things which are despised which God hath chosen to confound those that boast so much of their own wisdome and learning which hath been bought for mony Answ In answer whereto I shall say no more but this that it is vox praterea nihil a great crack of words that signifie nothing they would have passed better if they had proceeded out of any mans mouth besides your own Phil. 2.3 Prov. 26.12 Sir where the spirit of Christ is it is still accompanied with humility and self-denyal and such esteem of others better then themselves Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit there is more hope of a fool then of him 1 Cor. 8.2 1 Cor. 13.9 Act. 8.20 And for what learning and wisdom God hath been pleased to endow any of us withal we do and must acknowledge it is all beyond desert and that as yet We know nothing as we ought to know for in this military course of ours we know but in part Nay t is God especially who illuminates our weak understanding and therefore their money perish with them that think that the gift of God may be purchased with money To con lude the preface you write But it seemeth that this man by his writing hath not been much acquainted with that which is held by those which he is pleased to call Lunatick spirits and therefore that which he at the first sight hastily judgeth to be errour may upon better trial prove to be truth which useth to be unsavoury to those that delight in worldly gain Act. 16.19 and are exercised in a craft by which they have their wealth Acts 19.35 therefore I do not much wonder that my Position are unsavoury to Parson Lawson and so having examined those Arguments which are brought against them with much boasting of being unanswerable I shall endeavour by the assistance of the most High God to answer to his Arguments in order as they are stated Answ I have I confess been a good space of time an enquirer into your principles and an observer of your ways but never had so full an occasion to dive into the depth of that mystery of iniquity till I met with your papers and do now protest that the more I search into it the worse I like it and therefore shall say as formerly Gen 41.6 O my soul come not thou into their secret into their Assembly mine honour be not thou united And having thus routed your Preface and laid it even with the ground I apply my self to enter the listes with you about your Positions wherein you assault me thus The first of the Positions is by this man granted to be a truth viz. Position 1. That the most holy and high God did from all eternity by one sole and single act see all whatsoever he purposed to do or appoint to be done by any of his creatures Answ Good Sir be pleased to revise your own Position again and you will find that as it is thus stated it is onely my concession and not your Position indeed I was ashamed to see such high mysteries to be put into such an ugly dress so manacled tortured and unjoynted that a man could not well distinguish between head and heel and therefore by your good leave I made bold to new model your Position and put it into this gaâ—be as now you see it and so as here posited I own it and do affirm it true but as by you first asserted it may be lyable to many exceptions which because you seem to wave and by disclaiming your own have adopted this as legitimate I will
of a horse is a horse c. and therefore by the name of the Son of man is understood him not which is simply a man as Adam was but him that is born of a man Adam was a man made not born and therefore he is called a man but not the Son of man It is observed therefore that the Hebrews in this their manner of speaking when they say thou art a son or child of disobedience a son of perdition c. that they assign as it were disobedience and perdition to be as the father and that thou art born of that and therefore that such expressions do not barely signifie that thou art disobedient but that thou wert born disobedient not that thou art in a perishing condition but that thou wert born a son of perdition not that thou art a sinner but that thou wast born a sinner So likewise in those words a child of wrath not that thou art obnoxious to wrath and condemnation because of thy sins but that thou art born a child of wrath guilty of eternal condemnation so much of the first The second thing considerable is how they were by nature the children of wrath The word nature hath several acceptations First sometimes it is taken for the substance and essence of a thing but thus acording to his essence and substance man is not a child of wrath because the substance is not sin though it be infected with sin Secondly for the first principle of motion and rest in every thing whether that principle be in the substance or that it be the natural quality and propriety of the thing And after this manner the first nature of man was good yea very good for in that the Lord did imprint a power of motion to that which was good to know love and worship God and thereby to have life everlasting but this nature was lost by the sin of Adam and instead thereof there succeeded a naughty quality whereby it comes to pass that there is no natural motion in us but unto that which is evil viz. against God and against his son Jesus Christ and no rest but in that which is not good This evil quality came by the temptation of the Devil and it is as a pestilence that hath infected both the soul and body of man man I say remaining the same in his essence and substance is infected with the venome of this evil quality so that he can effect or work nothing but that which is like himself because from this he is moved unto all actions Hence it is that there arise all the evil thougths in the mind all the perverse and distempered affections in the heart and all wicked motions and desires in the will And this corruption of the whole nature which is otherwise called concupiscence the Apostle cals in this place nature viz. the first principle or beginning of all evil actions and motions whether external or internal and therefore whereas this is sin it doth deservedly make such the children of wrath Thirdly nature is oftentimes taken for nativity or birth natura a nascendo because that every one being conceived in sins and born in iniquities Psalm 51.5 and that we are born ungodly and enemies to God and therefore most worthy that God should be angry with us and inflict eternal punishments on us and therefore in this sense likewise are we said to be the children of wrath i. e. rom our first conception and nativity and because we are descended from Adam and sinned in him and all are born children of wrath even infants likewise though they have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression i. e. actually Rom. 5.14 yet because they are born of sinful parents the infection becomes hereditary to them and they likewise children of wrath as well as others After this manner of speech is that of the Apostle Gal. 2. We which are Iews by nature i. e. Jews by birth and nativity And by this I hope the judicious Reader will find that I have both confuted your reasons and confounded your gloss so that the third absurdity will stick as close to your proposition as the spots do to the Leopard and now I shall have leisure to attend your motion in the removal of your quarters to the fourth absurdity which is this Then Paul was mistaken Rom. 9.21 in not assigning sin to be the cause of reprobation Answ Paul was not mistaken for he hath assigned continuing in sin and unbelief to be the cause of reprobation Rom. 9.32 and 11.20 and 1.2 6 28. Answ Sir this hath been your dealing in all this tract of reprobation wherein you make no distinction between non-election or negative reprobation which is before all time whereon your position is built and against which my undertakings are as you deliver it and whereof there is no cause assignable besides the good pleasure of Gods most holy will and that reprobation which is in time and whereof sin is the cause and whereunto those Scriptures by you quoted do answer which no man contradicts But yet this last reprobation or that in time is not immutable as is the other Jer. 6.30 Isa 1.25 Zac. 13.9 Ro. 11.23 for a man or a nation may be as reprobated silver today and yet refined from the dross to morrow they may be broken off to day and grafted in again to morrow for God is able to graft them in again But for that reprobation whereabout our dispute is as it is immanent in God and eternal so it is also immutable and unchangeable as is God himself And so I pass to the fifth absurdity which is this Absurd 5. The same Apostle then answered very unsoundly to these objections Rom. 9.13 19. The first is If God reprobated Esau because he hated him he was unjust The second ver 19. why doth he yet find fault for who hath resisted his will for he might in one word have answered to both objections and said that sin was the cause of reprobating both Esau and Pharaoh but he saith the contrary ver 11. when they had done neither good nor evil Iacob have I loved and Esau have I hated Answ To the first when I shall hear any say that God reprobated Esau because he hated him without assigning any other cause and prove it I shall say more to it and in the mean time I shall desire to have this question resolved Whether those that shal preach such doctrine As that God reprobated Esau because he hated him and for no other cause do not make God much like the envious Jews Ioh. 15.25 who hated the man Christ Jesus without cause Answ Sir for the resolving of your question and satisfying of the scruple I must tell you first that God is said to have hated Esau before he was born or that he had done either good or evil that is called hatred comparatively in respect of that love he shewed unto Iacob he may be said to hate him