Adam or his posterity but from their sinfulness and that they should not have dyed but upon the supposal of sin And I think he hath done no good office to suggest such a thing as this concerning Mr. Bolton to make the world believe that such an able and faithful Teacher of Divine Truth would play any the least part of the Socinians damned Game In the two following pages he is very vain p. 132. and p. 133. and deserves not my Ink to he spent upon him and if I should lay open all his weaknesses 't is possible I might be thought to deal over hardly by him those therefore that little concern the point in hand or are answered already I need not concern my self with I pass therefore to the next p. 134. where the substance of his many words is thus in brief That if death be the punishment of sin then Christ by freeing his people from the punishment of their sins must free them from dying which he doth not I answer Christ by freeing them from the punishment of sin hath also freed them from death so far forth as 't is a punishment viz. from an accursed death The Faithful therefore though they suffer death yet they suffer it not as a punishment properly so called nor in a way of vengeance but in a way of mercy and therefore blessed are they that dye in the Lord. That pale horse though it sometimes affrights them Philip. 1.23 yet it is sent on a good errand viz. to bring their Souls into the blessed presence of their Lord and Saviour which the Apostle assures us in the same Text is far better than to live with their friends in this sinful world p. 135 136. In the 135 and 136. pages there is nothing that I think it worth while to trouble my self with some things being beside his purpose and others in a great measure against it And that which is for it how do the wicked perish for ever if they must live for ever is no new dish but only the old coleworts new sodden and how much it is worth is discoverable from that which was said but a little before to what he had offered about eternal life in pag. 130. p. 137. R. Men build much in this point upon the second death but what that death is they cannot agree B. I think he is much mistaken in this and do not doubt but Orthodox Divines are very well agreed in their Judgments about it and describe it with little variation one from another But the main mischief is that their Judgment of it agrees not to his and if his be infallible theirs must needs be erroneous R. Mr. Perkins saith the Second death is a total separation from God and if so it is not a punishment without end and seeing God is every where if they be any where how can they be absent from God B. But as Mr. Perkins was as wise a man as himself so his speech herein is not so absurd as he imagines it to be yea I doubt not but it is sound and good and now I shall consider briefly what he saith unto it 1. if so then it is not a punishment without end what warrant he hath to make such an Inference from it I for my part cannot understand for what if that Separation be everlasting as we believe it to be then it will be vanity to say so yea a contradiction too So that this Collection of his is utterly groundless unless he understand this Separation to be by Annihilation and if he do so I have shewed the absurdity of it sufficiently already in disproving the Doctrine of the Annihilation of the wicked 2. R. If they be any where how can they be absent from God seeing God is every where But certainly he must be a very silly man that can think Mr. Perkins was such a fool as to suppose that they could be absent from the Lord in a proper sense or out of his presence I dare say that was very far from his mind and he needed no more to be taught the doctrine of God's Omnipresence than wicked men need to be comforted by his Book against the fears of Damnation yet because he hath mentioned the word Absent from God I may lawfully put him in mind of that Text of the Apostle 2 Cor. 5.6 in 2 Cor. while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord he did not think he and the rest of the Faithful were where God is not while they lived in this world and yet he expresses it after that manner because here they were as it were absent from the comfortable presence of God in comparison of that comfort which their Souls should have in his Glorious Presence after they had left their bodies So in this case we mean by the Second Death the total and perpetual Separation of the wicked and impenitent from the comfortable Presence and the glorious Presence of God Luke 13.28 as when they shall be shut out of his glorious Kingdom and depart from Christ to dwell with the Devil and his Angels And though this be not a death properly so called yet it may fitly be called by that name because of the terror of it Death being naturally the most terrible thing as Heaven is fitly called Paradise for the pleasure and purity of it Luke 23 4â—2 though it be not that place which was mentioned in the 2. of Genesis And if a state of worldly troubles may be called a Death in 2. Cor. 1.10 compared with the 8. verse how much more may a state of endless punishment be called by that name See Rev. 21.8 And thus having vindicated Mr. Perkins from Mr. R's cavils I shall pass over the idle discourses of the 139 and 140 pages and speak a few words of that which seems more worthy of my censure in 141 page thus p. 141. R. We read in Rom. 2.31 of very great sinners proud spightful Inventors of evil things and such like yet the word saith not Ro. 6.21 that they are worthy of more than death and if death be the end of these things then there is not any thing to come after death B. This is a rare piece of Learning indeed and such as the common sort of Preachers never had the confidence to teach their hearers either from the Pulpit or the Press But that it may not be thought better of than it deserves let us examine it briefly the main strength of his Speech lies in this That God hath not said that those wicked ones mentioned in that place were worthy of any more than death true indeed they were worthy of no more punishment than death for that death there spoken of is nothing less than eternal Damnation And thus the unpardonable sin 1 Joh. 5.16 called by St. John a sin unto death that is such a sin as necessarily and infallibly brings eternal damnation upon the sinner
planted in man an universal love to man especially to his own off-spring be they obedient or disobedient What Bowels of love in Parents c. p. 170. They do not desire their off-spring though disobedient should suffer such a torment as these men speak of one Year to an end therefore God will not inflict extreme miseries upon men for ever since they are his off-spring as they are his Creatures for God is not less merciful than man B. THis is the substance of his proof And if it be sufficient to prove what he intends by it God's mercy and Parents pity not alike in all things it will be sufficient for other purposes too which Christians will not judge it to be viz. to prove that the Devils shall not suffer extreme punishments without end and that Christ was not punished extremely for the offences of such as we For the former we will take his Argument and urge it thus Parents would not desire to cast their Children into an irrecoverable state of misery upon their first act of disobedience towards them How can we think then that God would cast the Angels that were the noblest of all the works of his hands into an irrecoverable state of misery upon the commission of the first sin against him for God is not less merciful than Man Doubtless the Proof is as strong this way as the other way and yet it is not strong enough nor will not cannot prevail upon them that believe what the Scripture saith in the case for let us prove what we will yet the Apostle hath told us 2 Pet. 2.4 Jude 6. Matth. 25.41 that God spared not the Angels that sinned but cast them down c. 2 Pet. And hath prepared everlasting fire for them Matth 25. And therefore whatsoever proofs are brought to the contrary are not Proofs truly so called but Sophistical Arguments and meer deceits For the latter also we may reason as strongly after the same rate A good Father would not have his beloved Son that never offended him be severely punished for those offences that he never committed therefore much less would the God of all Mercy lay the punishment of our sins upon his Holy Son Jesus in whom his Soul delighted One Egg is not more like another than this is like my Author's Proof aforesaid And though it might be approved by Socinians yet Christians will not be wrought upon by it Esay 53. while they read and believe Rom. 4.25 compared with Rom. 5.8 and in one word the 53d Chapter of Esay And thus we have seen how far this his Proof is from being infallible and therefore the Reader will not think I am bound to say any thing more unto it yet for his farther satisfaction I will add thus much viz. That God is not as Man in every thing for then he should not be a God indeed nor may his goodness and Man's be compared together any farther than the Scriptures will allow of And though he be more merciful than Man is and will shew forth more love and kindness to the meanest of his faithful servants than the most compassionate Parent ever did or can do to his beloved Child yet his saving Mercy hath its proper objects and is not extended promiscuously to all the Sons of Men. He is free in the exercising of it and hath mercy on whom he will And his Mercy no more binds him to save All Men than it did to save all Angels The wicked and impenitent are the objects of his wrath as the Returning sinners are the objects of his love Again God is not only a God of Mercy Psal 94.1 but a God of Vengeance To him vengeance belongeth Psal 94. where the word vengeance is mentioned twice in one verse And he is the Supreme Law-giver and Governour of the World Now as he is such it belongs to him to see that his obstinate and uncurable Enemies may not go unpunished And though he desires not their punishment for everlasting to use Mr. R.'s word as it is a punishment yet he will inflict it as it is an Execution of Justice and a discovery of his holiness and hatred of sin and the like And to come to the comparison a Father that is a Judge and a Law-giver as well as a Father and as such hath made a Law that such and such offenders shall suffer so many Months imprisonment who ever they be may not dispense with that Law if it be just no not in the case of his own Children when they commit the said offences So the God of Mercy being a Judge and Law-giver is engaged by his Honour and Justice to punish sin which is the transgression of his Law according to its desert If you say it is not punished upon the Saints I answer That it was punished upon their Surety Christ Jesus in their place and they are freed by the merit of his sufferings But it is not so with the Enemies of his holiness so remaining they must answer for themselves Proof 9 R. If men had deserved everlasting punishment yet why may not God shew that mercy as not to inflict it as well as to let the Rain fall upon them that no way deserve it p. 171 172. Men often shew more kindness to disobedient Children than they deserve And may not God do the same B. This if Man had deserved such punishment is spoken only for Argument sake for he doth not grant it to be a truth but it hath been proved before whether he will grant it or not But this being supposed What then For saith he why may not God shew so much mercy as not to inflict it upon them that deserve it as he gives the rain to them that deserve it not I answer He doth shew so much mercy upon many such yea many thousands as not to inflict it on them All that truly turn from their evil ways and believe on his Son Christ Jesus shall for his sake be secured from it and he will spare them as a man spareth his own Son that serveth him But if he ask Mal. 3.16 17. why he may not shew such mercy upon all in general or upon the wicked that continue such Then I except against his question for we are not concerned in this case to enquire what he may do but what he will do Things revealed by his own confession belong to us now he hath revealed his will to the contrary as in other places so in that so often mentioned Matth. 25. These shall go away into everlasting punishment and to take vengeance of them that know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ 2 Thess 1.9 who shall be punished with everlasting destruction c. 2 Thess But he hath not said he will give them no Rain while they live on Earth and therefore is free to give it them though they deserve it not So that for a Man to ask why God
of Atra Bilis and to have no ground at all in the Scriptures Sol. What he hath done in this particular is too well known in the World and how well he hath done it is my Business to discover in this Book And I trust Good Reader that thou wilt perceive by that which follows that he hath not done it well nor indeed any better than the Socinian hath proved that there is no Trinity or than the Atheist hath proved that there is no God The Method observed And now I shall proceed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this following Method 1. To lay down some Arguments to prove the Everlasting Punishment of the wicked that live and dye such 2. To examine the said Book in all the principal parts and passages of it for it will not be worth while to speak of all he hath written there being very many Impertinencies in it 3. To improve the Doctrine in a practical way for Instruction Exhortation c. But before I speak of either of these it may seem needful to say something of the Author of this precious Piece which I am to deal with 1. Who the Author was If any Man should ask me who it was I would answer It was O Grande nomen Mr. S. Richardson even that admired Resolute Richardson whom the good Men of his Party did boast of so greatly and supposed to be a fit Match for the London-Ministers viz. indefinitely for any of them or for All of them to deal with See the Author in the Margin * Mr. J. Collings Vindic. Ministerii my Preface to the Reader sub finem And therefore some may imagine I have been too venturous to engage voluntarily with so great a Champion as He But yet Reader I am not discouraged I hope to come off clear and to pass without hurt through all the Pikes of his Arguments and Subtilties for God and his Truth are greater and stronger than Mr. R. and his Fallacies But to return to that which I was speaking of I say it was He whom the World is so much beholding to for the Book I am opposing For I have seen his Name prefixed to it though it be not set in that Edition of it which I have and perhaps it might be as good policy to conceal his Name in the second Edition as it was to mention it in the former 2. What he was But though it may be easily gained what his Name was yet it may be more difficult to discover what Himself was I remember the old saying Noscitur ex socio c. A dark Fellow is to be expounded by his Companions It might be questioned whether Mr. R. were himself of any Religion for all Religions have a Hell in their Creed and yet he hath none in his wherefore his Opinion concludes him of the doubtful gender in point of Religion so that we must be forced as was said to expound him by his Companions And if you would know who they were and what Perswasion they were of you may fitly consult the Anabaptists Confession of Faith Printed Anno Dom. 1644. which that * Dr. Featly Light of our Church now fixt in a Higher Orb was sometimes pleased to pass some Animadversions upon I mean in his Book called The Dippers dipt Where he tells you and you may safely take his word for it That the said Confession was subscribed by Paul Hobson Thomas Gunne and others of the same stamp and amongst the rest by S. Richardson to whom I would wish if he be living saving Mercy and a sound Mind And thus much by way of Introduction to my following Discourse The first particular whereof is now to be presented to thy serious thoughts and favourable censure CHAP. I. SECT II. An endless state of Punishment for the Wicked and Impenitent proved and the Proofs thereof vindicated from the Exceptions of Mr. R. and his Brethren THE fittest Method of procedure in my present Design seems to be that which is mentioned viz. To prove the truth of the Doctrine contended for before I meddle with the main Body of Mr. R. his Sophistical Argumentations namely that abovesaid And herein I do not undertake to convince the Atheist or drive him out of his Resolved Infidelity but rather to confirm the Christian in the Belief of this Doctrine which he hath been so often put in mind of by his Teachers And the first Argument that I would propose Scripture-Testimony the strongest Argument is the Testimony of God in Scripture and that is indeed the strongest of all Arguments and the most convincing to the Soul and Conscience As the learned have sufficiently evinced Vid. Crakanthorp Logic. de Argum. à Testimonio Logicos passim de Testimonio Disputantes for Truth is Essential to the True God Item Scheibl Topic. cap. 31. sect 50. Titus 1.2 He cannot lye A Man may be a Man though he be not true in his word but God could not be a God if he were not so Keckerm Log. lib. 3. cap. 13. for God to be false in his Word implies a manifest contradiction And there is nothing more natural to a Man in his right Wits than to conceive his Maker to be True in all that he saith or revealeth Wherefore if we have the Testimony of God for it in his written Word we may safely build upon it I say His written Word for that 's the Testimony that we are to enquire of Esay 8.20 And as for those inward Impulses Revelations A digression of Revelations Enthusiastick impressions c. and Suggestions of the Spirit which some have sufficiently boasted of and more than sufficiently trusted to as to Divine Testimonies they have often proved to be the Delusions of the lying Spirit and the false lights which the Prince of Darkness hath set up in the blinded hearts of those that shut their eyes against the light of that Word which is able to save our Souls having them so dreadfully dazelled with the glory of the light within them as they use to speak whose Enthusiastick Errors have been examined by many worthy Men. Spanhem Syntag Theol. Beckman Exercitat in Appendice c. And their vanity hath been shewed by famous or infamous instances in Mr. Sam. Cleark His Mirror Cap. 27. Exampl 17. Concerning the horrid Delusions which a Gentleman in Warwick-shire fell into after he looked to be taught by Revelations and Inspirations and had refused to hear any conformable Minister preach c. As also of one Mr. Gilpin in the same Chapter The sum of which History I have briefly set down in my Caution against Quakerisme Near the end I say if we have the Testimony of God in his written Word for the Doctrine I assert then we may be bold to believe it and must believe it though Mr. R. and his Companions in Infidelity should write never so many Books against it Reader if thou dost not believe the Scriptures to be