which is Genes 25. 22 23. And the children saith the story of Moses strugled together within her and shee said if it be so why was I thus and shee went to inquire of the Lord. And the Lord said unto her marke here was the Divine oracle which the Apostle relates two Nations are in thy womb and two manner of People shall be separated from thy bowells and the one People shall be stronger then the other People and the elder shall serve the yonger Therefore it is plaine that there is no manner of Decree nor nothing spoken of the persons of Iacob and Esau personally considered but only concerning their posterity Againe secondly I answer Further which I desire may be diligently noted for I suppose that a cleere understanding of this place will open a great light to the question now in hand if you will please therefore to take the spring of the first rise of the Apostles arguing in this passage of Scripture you must begin at the sixth Verse And you will cleerly see that the Apostle had nothing to do it was no part of his scope to argue the point of election from eternity but that which he had to doe it was to prosecute and to give further confirmation to the Doctrine of Justication by Faith which he had set on foot and mannaged all along this Epistle to this very place for the Apostle Writing his Epistle chiefly to the Iewes he doth declare unto them how that God Himself did Preach this very Doctrine unto their foreFathers the great Patriarks and Founders of their Nation and People and that first unto Abraham and afterwards to Isaac and his Family as if you mind the carriage of the place you wil cleerly see in the sixth Verse not as if the Word of God had taken none effect for they are not all Israel which are of Israel He doth here anticipate an Objection which the Iews would be ready to make against the Doctrine of Justification which he had handled and Preached to them M. Symp. Under favour I conceive it is against the Lawes of disputation for you to speak so much we did not come hither to here you Preach a Sermon but give me a short Answer to my Argument that so I may reply My Argument is that the Decrees of God doe respect Particular Persons and I prove this from Iacob and Esau and in stead of giving an Answer to it you fall upon a long and tedious Discourse to little purpose which is not faire M. Goodw. Will you say it is not faire to open the Scriptures upon which we argue or doe you desire that the sence and mind of God in what you say and produce should not be understood Do you mean to argue in the dark and will you not have the minde of God brought forth into the light M. Am. I humbly intreat leave to desire that you would please to contract your Answer to the 11 and 12. Verses which M. Sympson hath propounded as a ground to prove his Proposition denyed by you Mr Goodw. If the 11 and 12. Verses cannot be understood nor an account given of them without shewing the scope and Context and Coherence of the place then if I be long and you finde fault you do not reflect so much upon me as upon the Word of God it self which is so mysterious and deep and so remote from the common apprehensions of men that it cannot be understood otherwise But I shall undertake upon the opening and clearing of the Apostles minde in the Context to shew that your Argument from this place is altogether irrelative to your purpose Mr Ames I humbly conceive that the 11. Verse may readily receive an Answer from you without reference to the fore-going Verses and that according to the reading which you were pleased to give us out of the Greek namely That there is no mention made there of Children as you learnedly observed And I humbly conceive it lies as a Foundation of that Consequence which the Apostle brings in the 11. Verse which 11. Verse is a general rule concerning Election and the Purpose of God The children being not yet born that the Purpose of God according to Election might stand and that without any reference to the Works of the Creature I humbly conceive that this is the Foundation which the Apostle layeth in the 11. Verse without any relation to his former Discourse unless it be to ground it upon Mr. Goodw. If you please to minde the words you will see that the whole Verse is inserted in a Parenthesis and it lieth within the body of a Context or Coherence which cannot be clearly and fully understood without the opening of what went before Mr Ames I humbly intreat one word more Whereas you observe that these words lie within a Parenthesis I conceive that a Parenthesis hath no dependance upon the Context Mr Griffith What is pertinent to the opening of a Text methinks should be for the edification of all Mr Goodw. If you please to minde the first particular in the 11. Verse For which is a Rationative Particle it doth lead us as it were by the hand and carries us back to what went before and there is a Reason given in it of somewhat which the Apostle had before asserted Mr Ames I humbly conceive the Parenthesis begins at these words That the Purpose of God according to Election might stand not of Works but of him that calleth and that the other hath reference to the former discourse Mr Goodw. Then if you please we will onely go to the Verse immediately before for I suppose that this present discourse between us and discussion of this business the main intent and drift of it is not that you or I be pleased but that the Congregation and People of God be edified and therefore whatsoever doth in a clear and direct way tend to their edification that I conceive ought not to be denyed either by me in reference to you not by you in reference unto me and the opening of this Scripture may I conceive tend much that way Mr Symps This was my Argument That the Decrees of God do respect particular Persons and for the proof of this I cited this place where Jacob and Esau are spoken of and Pharaoh afterwards and therefore the Decrees of God do respect particular persons and not men of such and such a sort as you say though if you please that we may not be wearisom to the Congregation we will let that of Jacob and Esau alone and go to Pharaoh or unto some other Scripture Mr Goodw. No there is a great deal more yet to be said to it Nay I suppose it is the most material piece of Scripture that possibly you could have fallen upon Mr Symps I desire then a short Answer to my Argument Mr Goodw. I have shewed you before That all Gods Decrees they are precedaneous to any Creature before it was in being for God hath no temporary
see whether any such thing was so or no. M. Powell This is my witnesse the testimony of my conscience and here are many present can witnesse also that I would indeavour that there might bee a meeting of the Ministers and Elders of the Churches of London that so there might be a right understanding of things between them M. Price Sir I verily believe that you are ingenuous and have done nothing out of rancor M. Jess I desire to propound this to your consideration because I perceive that M. Powell's gift doth not lie in a way of dispute I rather desire that some other may be the party M. Goodwin I suppose there is no man will preach a Doctrine but he will give an account of it and will be able to prove it and so in a sense he is fit to dispute it M. Powell I account not my self a disputer of this world M. Goodwin He that disputeth the things of Iesus Christ he is no disputer of this world M. Powell I am come to maintain and assert in the plainest manner according to the Scriptures the truths that I do hold and that other Pastors and and Teachers of Christian Churches do hold and M. Goodwin is come to maintaine that which he conceives to be truth let us as we are able go on to maintain them for the glory of God and the edification of the people M. Goodwin We are upon the point agreed only if so be you decline the name of a dispute and that which it imports and exhibits then if you will nominate and state your Doctrine in opposition to mine and so argue it from the Scriptures by considering the parts of it first one and then another I shall be willing to admit of this conference between us M. Powell With all my heart I agree to it At this turn M. John Sympson besought a blessing upon the undertaking which done proceeded thus M. Powell M. Goodwin hath offered it and I am willing to consent to it that each of us lay downe those things which we hold and so to give Scriptures and Reasons for the maintaining thereof M. Goodwin That was not my proposition but the one half of it was for since this meeting was to satisfie you in what I hold supposing my judgement to be erroneous and yours orthodox and sound my proposition was that you would please to lay down your opinion which is contrary to mine and so produce your proofs from Scripture one after another that so we may see whether they will amount to the confirmation thereof yea or no. M. Iess You that were here the last time please to make discovery how for was proceeded M. Goodwin It may be M. Powell may go more clearly to work if he will propose his opinion contrary to mine and first see if it be so and then produce his proofs of it and in case his Doctrine shall be found contrary to mine and if he can prove it then I will submit M. Powell For my part I shall very willingly and freely accept of this way as conceiving it the best to understand the truth for my aim is to know wherein we differ and how we may come to be reconciled I offered three things the last time and shall now endeavour to prove them I conceive by what I heard from you then and formerly that we differ concerning Election Redemption Mans will and concerning falling away from grace Now if it please you you shall have your choice whether of these we shall discourse of and so I shall lay down my position and give you the grounds of it M. Goodwin First you have no ground from what you heard from me to conceive that my judgement was concerning falling away M. Iess Your desire the last day M. Powell was to discourse concerning Election and Redemption and the variety and multiplicity of Questions will but confound you M. Powell This was that which M. Goodwin laid down That Christ died intentionally on Gods part and on his own part to save all the posterity of Adam M. Goodwin Though for your satisfaction I gave you an account of my opinion yet I desire that you would state yours in opposition to mine M. Powell I offered then to prove first that Iesus Christ did not die alike for every man Secondly that he did not die to redeem every man from the guilt of his sin and from the curse of the Law M. Goodwin If you will argue against my Doctrine you must state your opinion contradictory to mine M. Powell It will lie upon you in the first place to prove your proposition and then upon me to prove the contrary M. Goodwin If you please then though the nature of the dispute doth not call upon me for it yet I will give you a briefe account of my opinion what it is and in what sense I hold it and then shall prove it from the Scripture and so that two do not speak at once I care not though twenty speak to it M. Powell I desire only to speak three things in three words because I hope they will tend to the glory of God First that if any of us shall break out into passion we may be told of it and kept from it Secondly if any one hath any thing to speak unto the point after both of us have spoken that they may do it orderly Thirdly that we may now agree whether to argue in a syllogisticall way or otherwise the Propositions being laid down to bring Scriptures to prove them M. Goodwin If you will reason from the Scriptures and argue from them I am willing M. Powell It is necessary that we explain the termes in the Proposition M. Goodwin This then is my judgment and doctrine touching the point of Gods intention in the death of Christ or in the matter of redemption and salvation I say it down thus That God did intend or the intention of God in the death of Christ was that all Adams posterity should be saved and redeemed This doctrine I thus explain and this is my sense in it When I affirm that the intention of God was that all Adams posterity should be saved I attribute intentions to God only in such a sense as he is capable of intending any thing or wherein they are appropriable or attributable to him which sense is this Supposing God to be a most pure simple undivided and indivisible Essence in himself not capable of any multiplicity or plurality of actions but remaining unchangeable every way he doth not intend things after the manner of creatures the difference I explain thus A man when he intends any thing the act of his mind by which his intention is produced it is essentially distinct from his essence and being and from the nature of his soul so that his soul is one thing and his intention another but now in attributing intentions to God I do not conceive that his intention is one thing and God himself another but he
of his Son the salvation of all men M. Powell Your argument depends upon the word World supposing it to be taken in a uniform sense M. Lordell If it please you Sir deny one of the Propositions M. Powell I deny your minor if by the world you mean all Adams posterity M. Goodwin Very well I prove it thus Either by the world here must be meant all Adams posterity or particularly those whom you call in your language the elect of God but by the world are not meant only the Elect of God in your sense and therefore by the world is meant all mankind without exception M. Powell I may deny both your Propositions M. Goodwin Repeat them and then deny them M. Powell repeated the Argument and answered thus First your major proposition the world is taken in Scripture not only for all the world that is every particular man and for all the Elect but severall other wayes But I come to your minor and say that by the world in this place is meant the Elect of God M. Goodwin If by the world is meant the Elect of God only then the sense of the place must run thus So God loved the Elect of God that whosoever of these Elect of God should believe they should not perish but c. Which clearly implies that some of the Elect of God will not believe and so consequently may perish but this is to put a non-sense upon the place and to destroy the savor that is in it and therefore cannot be the sense of it as taken in this argument that which destroyeth the construction of the sentence and the savor which is in it which alone is fit to feed the understanding of a man that cannot be the sense of the place but now to understand the word world in this place of the Elect only it makes the sense altogether unprofitable and senselesse Ergo M. Powell To this Argument I answer that this may be the sense of the word world and the words may as well be read thus So God loved his Elect that he gave c. that such and such may be saved that is that they for whom he gave Jesus Christ might believe and so be saved for the Lord did not onely love them but he intended to bring them to believe and so the extend of his love and of believing they are as large the one as the other God so loved the Elect that he would give them faith and save them M. Goodwin I do not understand your answer but either you mean by the world the Elect only or else more then the Elect or all mankind in generall but say I neither of the former senses can be meant neither the Elect only nor some others besides the Elect but onely the whole posterity of Adam M. Powell I say by the word world in this place is meant the Elect only because the Evangelist saith God so loved the world he puts a so upon it Now you never find that God in Scripture is said to love all the posterity of Adam with such a love which is here called a loving of them so and which is called in Eph. 2. a great love M. Goodwin The Scripture holds forth a twofold love of God First a generall love which is attributed to him in respect of all his creatures and secondly a more particular and speciall love that is to those who have behaved themselves according to his Will and Word by believing in his Son and so by faith and holinesse continue to the end And whereas you conceive that this particle so here in the Text is only augmentative that it only declares the greatnesse of the love of God this I absolutely deny for together with the greatnesse of this love it doth modifie and restrain it and reduce it to this forme and tenor of love it is not said simply so God loved the world that he gave his Son that all the world should be saved then indeed it had been only augmentative but mark the condition which comes in upon which God loved the world and intends to save it viz. that whosoever believeth shall be saved Which shewes that this particle so is not onely intensive and doth not only stand there to declare the greatnesse and transcendency of the love of God to the world but the tenor and the limitation of it how and upon what termes God loved the world viz. that he gave his Son Jesus Christ so and upon such termes only that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life M. Powell You affirm these two things that there is a generall and a speciall love in God and when you speak of the generall you speak of it as extending to all the creatures But secondly when you speak of a speciall love you seem to say that it is not a speciall love which this word so holds out but I say this is a speciall love my reason is this because the Apostle when he speaketh of this very love in the 5. of the Rom. he saith that God commendeth his love towards us that whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for us This Scripture explains the other and this must of necessity be speciall love M. Goodwin If by speciall you mean great and wonderfull and so forth so I grant it is a speciall love but if you meane such a love or affection in God which is exprest or born by him towards those that do actually believe so that place in the Romans doth not hold forth or speak of any such love for the love of God is generall and he commends it exceedingly and marvellously herein but yet it was a love so limited and qualified by God that no persons should partake of the fruit of it but those that should believe And further this condition which God puts upon the partaking of the fruit of his love doth not represent his love the lesse commendable or lesse worthy of him God doth not shew himself lesse loving hereby but onely declares himself herein to be a God as well of wisdome as of love and it is his wisdome that doth moderate and steer all his Attributes in all their issuings and goings forth unto the world Now it had not been a love worthy of God so infinite in wisdome and goodnesse towards those whom ye call the Elect that they should partake of the benefit of this love but in and by and upon their believing M. Powell From this I gather two things First that the speciall love of God is towards men that are believers and that upon conditions of believing And secondly you say that that is the meaning of the Apostle in the Romans M. Goodwin No that I do not but the contrary and that it is the same with that which is here spoken of for it 's said that whilst we were yet sinners God sent his Son to die for us and I say that the intention of God in this love of his
and in the immediate expression of it in the gift of his Son it was that men should not partake of the compleat fruit and benefit of it but upon the terms and condition of believing M. Powell Let us keep to this either the love of God is a speciall or common love if it was a speciall love then it is a love to all or unto some if to all then you must prove it if to some then it must be tied to the Elect of God M. Goodwin I gave you clearly my sense before that there is an ambiguity in the word speciall if by that you mean great wonderfull and admirable so as to affect the heart and to ravish the souls of men so both this and that in the Romans are the speciall love of God but if you mean by it such a love or such expressions of love from God which are peculiar and appropriate only to believers so I say the love of God is not meant neither in this place nor in that M. Powell I conceive that in both these places he meanes a speciall love in the latter sense for the Evangelist and the Apostle do intend this speciall love to the Elect and my reason is this because God in the Scriptures holds forth no speciall love at all but unto such persons M. Goodwin You deny the conclusion for my conclusion is that it holds forth a speciall love M. Caryll That is not at all in the Question whether the love of God be speciall as a great love or a small love but whether speciall be opposed to generall M. Goodwin If by speciall he means such a love which is exprest or born by God towards those who are actuall believers then I say it is not speciall M. Powell When I speak of speciall love I mean not speciall so as belonging to actuall believers onely but unto those who believe as well de futuro as de praesenti M. Goodwin The Scripture doth not take knowledge or hold forth any speciall love in your sense to any but only unto those that are actuall believers As for all others whom you term the elect of God before their faith the Scripture still wraps them up in the same generall term of the world The whole world lieth in wickednesse saith John Now in this word world certainly there were more elect in your sense that did afterwards believer then at the present els all the labour and preaching of the Apostles had been in vain And therefore for the elect who do not actually believe they are no where presented in the Scripture as under part or fellowship of the speciall love of God which is appropriate to believers but they are bound up in the common bundle of the world and they are enemies to God and God an enemy to them in such a sense as to wicked men M. Powell Give me leave to answer unto this You say that if we mean a speciall love that is such a love as God beare unto believers that then there is no such love in God but unto actuall believers Now I deny this and affirm that there is the same love in God towards others that are elect who are not believers as there is to those who actually believe And this I prove from two Scriptures Jer. 31. 31. I have loved thee with an everlasting love and Rom. 9. 11. Jacob have I loved c. and now from hence I will argue thus That love which these two texts hold forth it is a speciall love and it is towards persons that were not actuall believers M. Cranford M. Goodwin's argument formerly was to this effect That the love of God was the motive to the giving of Christ is extended unto the world and therefore the giving of Christ must likewise concern the world M. Powell's Answer was that by the world is meant onely the elect this was took away thus that such a construction of the word would take away the savor and sense of the Scripture Now M. Powell should have given an answer to this and proved that the love of God in that place is meant of a speciall love Now I desire you to have respect to this word world where your Argument chiefly consists and prove that the word world in a narrower sense then the whole world takes away the savor of the words M. Caryll M. Goodwin seems to conclude against any interpretation but onely that of a universall because if it be taken in any narrower you spoile the sense M. Drake Let that be proved that it marrs the sense M. Goodwin I beseech you consider the words God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever c. Now if by the world you will understand the Elect then the sense must run thus God so loved the Elect that whosoever of these Elect should believe should not perish c. For this word whosoever is a distributive word it must distribute some either the Elect or all men therefore the meaning must needs be that God so loved the world that whosoever they be whether Elect or not Elect that shall believe they shall be saved And if you look your best Expositors many of them do interpret the word world as I do universally Musculus and others M. Powell When M. Goodwin urged his Argument I denied the major and minor Proposition that the world was not taken in that sense onely M. Goodwin Why who then doth he mean by whosoever for that must needs relate to the persons of men and if to men then to some men or to all men if you will not understand it so you make an absolute nonsense of it and put a Pronoune without an Adjective Therefore this word whosoever must distribute either the Elect or all men or else some middle sort of men between both M. Drake I desire you to bring an Argument to prove it nonsense if by the world be meant the Elect. M. Goodwin Mind the words again God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in him c. That which I am to prove is that to make sense of the place the word whosoever must distribute some men either the Elect or all men or some other number of men between both If you deny that it must be distributive then find a Substantive to the Adjective who doth God meane when he saith whosoever doth he not mean what man soever M. Powell I think whosoever and world are of the same signification and extent and I suppose by the world there is meant those that should believe and not the world taken as it is oft in Scripture for all men I have given my reason why it cannot be understood but in the former sense for the Elect. M. Cranford Answer punctually to M. Goodwins Argument which is that the word whosoever is a distributive word dividing the subject spoken of into two parts and therefore the word world must not be understood
humbly request to know your judgement whether or no they depend upon the future condition of the Creature which is contingent or whether they be absolute independent and peremtary in themselves Mr. Goodw. Your question is very faire and pertinent and may help to give a further light into the businesse in hand and therefore my Answer to it is this I conceive that those Decrees of God from eternity they doe suppose a possibility of such states and conditions of men in time to be or that there will be such and such a generation of men as those Decrees do suppose and lay out but they doe not suppose any absolute necessity of such and such men of such and such qualities or qualifications to be and this is my sence touching your question Mr. Ames Sir I humbly crave leave to aske another question and to reply thus far that if so be these Decrees of God which even now you were pleased to grant were peremptory absolute and irreversible are now suppossitive of a state and condition of the Creature these two Assertions doe not seeme I humbly conceive to consist together if they were absolute in God as you was pleased to declare from eternity and yet have an eye upon the different sorts or kinds of Men that one part of them is hypotheticall and suppositive of such or such a state Mr. Goodw. No Sir if you understood me so then there was so much mistake in my Answer my sence is this and I would have both my sence and meaning and minde and judgement in these questions drawn out to the utmost and as far as I have any thought or peace of a thought in me I desire not to canceale or hide any thing from the view or cogniscence of any and therefore I accompt my self really and in good earnest beholding to any man that shall administer an occasion or give me an opertunity to expresse and hold forth to the utmost what God hath inabled me to conceive in them And therefore for that whereas there may seeme to be an inconsistency between these two Asserters as you seeme to conceive that the Decrees of God should be absolute and independent upon the Creature and yet that they should be relative to such and such a state or condition of Men I conceive that there is no manner no nor scarce so much as the face of an inconsistancy between them for when I say the Decrees of God are absolute and irreversible I do within this terme 〈…〉 Decrees include and presuppose such and such a state or kinde of men a◠for example God Decrees that such and such sorts of men shall be blinded and hardned in their hearts that is men of such and such a 〈◊〉 it Now when I say this Decree is absolute and irreversible my 〈◊〉 i◠not neither doe I say that it shall have to relation to any possible condition of the creature but it is irreversible and absolutely independent upon the Creature thus that God doth not take up this Decree nor is He moved or inclined to it by any extrinsicall or moving cause not by any thing in man nor by any thing done by man no nor from the nature of sin it selfe but this flowes meerly from his pure absolute and intire Will together with the infinite purity and holinesse of his Nature and of His Wisdom for they are all summoned together in all His Decrees there is an ingrediency and concurrence of all the great and glorious Perfections of God and these Decrees I say are taken up by Him without any manner of motion from the Creature inclining Him thereunto He workes all things according to the Counsell of His own Will His own pure absolute and independent Will and this is the tenor and the state of it that such and such Creatures such and such men who shall thus and thus transgress and persevere transgressing wilfully against Him they shall be hardned and blinded So that there is no inconsistancy at all in these two Assertions Mr. Ames I humbly crave leave once more to reply you are pleased to declare these Decrees of God to be originally in Himself without any extrinsicall motive perswading him hereunto Sir do you speak I beseech you of those two sorts of Men which these Decrees do finde in different states in the World or doe you speake only of that Decree which terminates it self only in one of these sorts or kindes of Men which it meets withall here Mr. Goodw. Sir I do by the Decrees of God in the notion wherein I expresse myself intend all and all manner of Decrees which have any relation to the Creature under what possible condition soever included in them as if you will name any Decree you shall finde such and such a kinde of Creature mentioned and included in it and I understand the Decrees of God universally all such as have any respect to the Creature or to any state of the Creature and I conceive that all the Decrees of God whatsoever I speak a great deale of my sence at once in this respect sorts and kinds of mens persons under such and such a qualification and that none of them respect any Particular Person whatsoever personally considered Mr. Symp. This is you Answer that the eternall Decrees of God doe respect certaine sorts of Men and not Particular Persons amongst Men But the Decrees of God do respect some Particular Persons amongst men and not so much some sorts and kinds of men and therefore this Answer of yours is not sufficient to my Argument Mr. Goodw. I deny your Minor Proposition Mr. Symp. I prove it from Rom. 9. 11. For the children being not yet borne neither having done any good or evill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of workes but of him that calleth it was said unto her Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated Here it is plaine that Gods Decree doth respect Particular Persons to wit Iacob and Esau and therefore it doth not respect some sorts of men its cleer I say from this instance and likewise from that concerning Pharaoh in the latter part of this Chapter Mr. Goodw. To your Argument I answer thus that there is nothing can be proved from hence for your purpose neither doth any thing appeare to make out any such conclusion for first of all whereas you render the words thus for the children being not yet borne you will finde if you looke that there is no such word as Children in the Originall and you may easily perceive it in the Translation it being inserted in a different Character and though I have many things to say concerning this place yet I desire that this first may be taken notice of that those whom the Apostle here speaks of they were not so much the Persons of Iacob and Esau as the Posterity of both and this is most cleer and evident in that Parallel place of Scripture from whence this is cited
Seasons and this is not a sufficient means for the knowledge of the gospell M. Goodw. I answer that to give Raine from Heaven and fruitfull Seasons filling mens hearts with food and gladnesse are sufficient to bring men to the knowledge of the Gospell and I give my accompt hereof from the words briefly thus because it is said That God left not Himself without Witnesse now the Nature and Property of all Witnesses especially on Gods part it is to speak intelligibly and to utter their voice and testimony in such a Language that they whom it concerne to hear and are present may understand and perceive Now the Witnesse which God did not leave himself here without it was the Witnesse of His goodnesse to the World which was by Jesus Christ M. Symp. I understand your Answer and Reply if the Word Preached be the only sufficient means for the working of Faith then men have not a sufficiency of means for believing who only have Raine and fruitfull Seasons But the Word Preached is the only sufficient means to work Faith in men and therefore Raine and fruitfull Seasons are not sufficient I prove the minor Proposition from that of the Apostle Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Preached but Raine and fruitfull Seasons cannot Preach the Word M. Goodw. You might have spared your Proof till it had been denyed But I answer by distinguishing of that tearme sufficient and sufficient means if by sufficient means you meane such a means so abundant as it were that men may with the more facility and ease attaine believing so I grant in this sence that the Preaching of the gospell is the only sufficient means of believing but if you meane by a sufficiency of means such a means without which it is impossible that any man should believe So I deny that the Preaching of the gospell that is in that sence wherein I suppose you meane a verball Preaching of it by men and that this is the only sufficient means to worke Faith in men and the Apostle in that Scripture speaks of such a Preaching of the gospell which is by the Sun Moone and Starrs M. Symp. I would have the Congregation to take notice and to understand that we are only upon the externall means of Preaching the gospell and I prove that that is the means of working Faith in men M. Goodw. That is not the thing denyed but that it is the only sufficient externall means But if you please we will conclude for the present with this Argument Mr. Ames Sir will you please then to bring that Argument in the Acts to a close M. Symp. I suppose we might beg so much time as to urge two or three Arguments more M. Goodw. I am not able in respect of my health nor otherwise to make any longer stay at this time M. Symp. Since then you are weary if you please to give a short Answer to this Argument that Raine and fruitfull Seasons are not a sufficient means to bring men to the knowledge of the gospell we will not be so injurious as to presse you above your bodily strength my Argument is this if the Preaching of the Gospell be the only sufficient means received for the making known of the meanes of grace then Raigne and fruitfull Seasons are not sufficient But the Preaching of the Gospell is the only sufficient means required for the making known of the meanes of grace and therefore Raine and fruitfull Seasons are not sufficient I meane Preaching of the gospell is the only externall meanes I know the Preaching of the spirit is necessary besides it Mr. Goodw. By the way Sir give me leave to Answer a word to that by expression of yours externall means c. if so be that your sence be as you have partly declared concerning the inward means of believing that Faith is wrought by an irresistable hand and power of God then I say all outward means whatsoever they are irrellative and have nothing at all to doe in the work of Faith But to your Argument I answer That if by the Preaching of the Gospell you meane a verball Preaching of it by men then I say it is not the only outward means which God is pleased to use to work Faith in men or to bring them to believe but if you meane by the preaching of it a preaching of it at large or in any way So I grant that the preaching of the gospell is the only absolute necessary and sufficient means to bring men to believe but then this I add that raine and fruitfull Seasons and filling mens hearts with food and gladnesse these do preach the gospell though not so cleerly punctually and distinctly yet as truly as words or as a verball peraching doth amount unto M. Symp. If raine and fruitfull Seasons doe not hold forth Jesus Christ as a mediator unto men then they do not preach the gospell But raine and fruitfull Seasons do not preach Jesus Christ a mediator ergo M. Goodw. I deny your minor proposition and say that these things do declare and hold forth a mediator M. Symp. If a man by the book of the Creature cannot possibly learne this Doctrine that Jesus Christ is the Son of God or that he came by his Death to make satisfaction for the sin of man then they do not hold forth Jesus Christ But it is impossible for any man by the booke of the Creature to come to the knowledge of Jesus Christ as one that hath made satisfaction by his death for the sin of man ergo M. Goodw. I answer by denying your major proposition Men may be saved and means may be sufficient to bring men to believe we speak of such a believing which is accepted by God unto Justification and so unto Salvation without the knowledge of all these particularities of the Death of Christ and I give this reason and accompt of this my answer because it cannot be proved but the contrary that the Jewes generaly even those that were Believers in those dayes they had no such distinct knowledge of Jesus Christ being the Son of God nor of his making satisfaction for the sins of men M. Symp. I prove that they had such a knowledge thus If they had salvation by Jesus Christ then they had such a knowledge but they had salvation by Jesus Christ ergo M. Goodw. That is Idem per Idem Mr. Ames Sir I humbly desire of you to declare your sence concerning that place in the Acts for it is conceived that by Gods not leaving Himself without witnesse there the Apostle speakes of the naturall capacity of Man and of that naturall light which is in him by which he is able to collect a Deity who is to be feared reverenced and obeyed And beyond this same naturall light and knowledge of a Deity we are not able to conceive how the Son Moon Raine and fruitfull Seasons speak any thing concerning the mediatorship of Jesus Christ M. Goodw.
salvation of all that are in authority should be prayed for But it is the mind of the Apostle and the will of Christ himselfe that the preceptive will of God should take place and be prayed for to be done in earth as it is in heaven Therefore certain it is that the meaning of the Apostle is that the salvation of all that are in authority should be prayed for And besides it is evident from the motives thus who will have all men to be saved which is the very reason why he enjoynes and requires prayer for these men because he will have all men to be saved Therefore the intent of the Apostle is that prayers should be made for all men for their salvation M. Simpson Thus you reason you say you will prove it from our own principle that if it be the preceptive will of God that all men should be saved then it is according to the will of God that we should pray for the salvation of all men But say you according to our own principle it is the preceptive will of God that all men should be saved Ergo To this I answer that there is praying for men two manner of wayes First absolutely Secondly conditionally We are not to pray absolutely for the salvation of all men not knowing whether God intended to damn them or to save them But we are to pray for all men conditionally that is if they be such for whom Christ died and belong to the election of grace In this sence we are to pray for the salvation of all men yet with submission to the will of God in the thing M. Good I argue against that distinction that the will of God is that we pray for all men not absolutely but conditionally If so be that the will of God be and the Apostles intent is that we should pray for all men conditionally Then Gods will is onely conditionall that all men should be saved But Gods will is not conditionall for it is exprest here who will have all men to be saved And therefore for you to distinguish and make that conditional which the Apostle makes absolute And for you to determine that men should do that conditionally which God hath cōmanded simply positively absolutely without any condition In this case you are not an interpreter but a maker of new Scriptures and you put your own sence upon the word of God M. Simpson I beseech you Sir speak nothing against me but prove what you can I say that it is not the will of God that the Saints should pray for all men M. Good That which God commands to be done absolutely namely without any manner of condition that is to be done absolutely and without condition But God commands that all men in authority should be prayed for without any condition or limitation And therefore it is the will of God that all those should be prayed for simply and absolutely M. Simpson I deny the second Proposition It is not the will of God that we should pray absolutely for the salvation of all men and women in the world without exception Christ did not pray so and we are to pray in faith but we cannot have faith to believe that God will save all men Nay it is contrary to the Scripture therefore we are not to pray for all men Mr. Good If so be that the Apostle here injoynes prayers to be made for all men without the mention of any condition in this kind and no such condition can be proved from any other Scripture Then we are to follow the expresness of the Letter and not to restraine stifle and quench the spirit of his meaning by any limitation or distinction of our own for that doth amount to a making of new Scriptures Mr. Simp. It belongs to you Sir not to speak so much The proposition which you are to prove is that the Apostle injoynes all men to be prayed for without any limitation Mr. Good The proposition is that the Apostle injoynes all men in Authority to be prayed for and this proves that by all in the motive to this Argument must be meant all men without exception For all men in the exhortation and all men in the motive to it must be of one and the same extent Mr. Simp. There is a plain exception against this for we gave this distiction before that by all is not meant all without exception but all sorts Mr. Good I have clearly proved the contrary Mr. Grif. I conceive Mr. Goodwin hath brought in his proof to that Mr. Simp. I tell you by all is meant all sorts of People Mr. Good There is not a jot or title of answer in what you say Mr. Simp. The distinction I made use of is this That it is not the mind of God that all men without exception should come to the knowledge of the truth but some of all sorts of men And likewise that it is not the will and mind of God that we should pray absolutely for the conversion and salvation of all men but onely for the salvation of those that are elected whom God did intend to save by Jesus Christ from all eternity Now if you have any thing more to say speak Mr. Good You have answered nothing to the purpose for here the words of the Text are For Kings and for all that are in Authority Now whether here be any restraint or limitation put upon the prayers of Christians for all those that are in Authority I leave to judge Mr. Simp. I can prove that by all in Scripture is meant all of such a quality such a state and condition And I say so it is taken here And the Apostle doth plainly hint it forth when he speaks of these particulars for he doth not speak of all particular men without exception but men of such a sort and condition so that if you have any plain Argument to overthrow this distinction we shall be willing to heare it Otherwise it is but Petitio principii A begging the Question and not proving of it Mr. Good No Sir the Scripture is plain and it hath been proved that by all men in the 4th verse must of necessity be understood all without exception The Argument to prove it was because the exhortation in the 1. verse is to have all men prayed for And to prove what these men were the second verse holds forth viz. That he would have all particulars of one sort and rank of men to be prayed for and consequently if all of one sort then all of every sort And therefore by all men in the former verse must be meant all men without exception The process of this discourse is so clear pregnant and regular that men of ingenuity cannot but own it Mr. Cranf I beseech you consider your fixst Argument was this that the Gentiles have sufficient meanes remotè of coming to faith and by faith to salvation your Text to prove it was this God would have all men
is one thing to pray for all men indifinitely and another thing to pray for all men universally We are to pray for all men indifinitely that is all sorts of men not defining these and these particular persons as set apart for salvation but we are not to pray for all men and women universally excluding none M. Grif. I pray speake to that Proposition prove that all are to be prayed for without excluding any M. Good I prove that we are to pray for all excluding none If so be that all are to be prayed for whom God hath not excluded from our prayers Then all simply indifinitely and universally are to be prayed for but all whom God hath not excluded from our prayers are to be prayed for Ergo. Mr. Simp. I deny the Major Proposition there are some excluded the prayer of Jesus Christ and consequently they are excluded the prayers of all the Saints And besides it is contrary to Scripture 1 John 5. 16. For such a man I do not say you should pray M. Good This I prove that your answer is clearly beside the sence of the Scripture and nothing to purpose as to my argument M. Simp. Prove that we are to pray for all men and women in the world without exception M. Good This is my sence in that proposition namely that all men as they are men and before they put themselves into an incapacity of being prayed for so all men I say are to be prayed for you bring a Scripture to prove that some men that have put themselves out of a capacity of being prayed for are not to be prayed for I do not say that all men in any condition after any degree of sining whatsoever as for example the sinne against the Holy Ghost that such men as these ought to be prayed for But I say that all men considered simply as men are to be prayed for M. Simp. These are words which you bring in now not before mentioned your proposition is universall without exception that all men are to be prayed for And I give a clear Scripture where we are commanded not to pray for some and therefore your Argument is false M. Good My argument is not false because I did not intend nor did I say that all men in any condition were to be prayed for but as they come into the world I told you in what sence I affirme it And the reason why I did not distinguish and limit it was because I did not thinke any man would be so irrationall as to conceive that I did include those that sin against the Holy Ghost I thought you had had more understanding M. Simp. The thing that you have indeavoured to prove is that the Apostle in that place of Timothy exhorts that prayers should be made for all men in generall but we prove that that cannot be the sence because it is contrary to another Apostle as in this place of John M. Good Nay I tell you it is not contrary to that Scripture though it should be taken in such a sence because those very persons who are there excluded by reason of that sin The very same persons before the committing thereof were capable of prayers and consequently all men are to be prayed for yea these men themselves are not excepted in reference to their persons but in reference to their sinnes Mr. Simp. The thing which you have indeavoured to prove though not able was that the Apostle in these words did intend that all men without exception were to be prayed for But by what we bring from John it is plain that all cannot be taken in that sence M. Good That in John is nothing to the purpose and I prove it thus The committing of the sinne against the Holy Ghost doth not multiply person in the World doth not make more soules to be in the world then there were And I say that all persons even these before they had sinned that sinne they were included in the Apostles all And you cannot prove that any Person in the world then had committed the sin against the Holy Ghost and if you could yet this was not to the purpose for even these very persons before they had committed that sinne were persons to be prayed for and consequently all M. Simp. I shewed there was a positive Command that we should not pray for some men therefore what Mr. Goodwin saith cannot be according to the mind of the Holy Ghost I beseech you speak something that we may not spend all our time upon one Scripture but if you please let us proceed to another M. Good Now you take upon you the place of a Moderatour M. Simp. Sir I consider the People and I think it very unprofitable for the Hearers to insist so long upon one Scripture M. Good I conceive it most profitable for as the light of the Sun is more profitable then the light of all the Stars so one Scripture where the truth is evident pregnant and cleare may be of more concernment to the people and more edifying to them then many M. Simp. Sir you are not able to overthrow the distinction that we have given but we have overthrowne your Argument M. Good I that you have just as you have overthrowne the Apostles And I trust that those who are present and heare they do consider and see how things are carried And for my part I shall be willing to leave those things which have been argued to their judgements and Consciences M. Simp. I conceive they will and I know they will not say that all men in the world are to be prayed for when the Apostle saith expresly that some particular men are not to be prayed for M. Good This is that which I say that mens committing the unpardonable sin doth not multiply persons in the world but these very men before they had committed that sin were to be prayed for Mr. Cranf Sir you have waded in this Argument I conceive as farre as your Argument will drive from this Scripture The substance of all is this you contend that every singular man in the world is to be prayed for at least under this notion of a man quatenus homo Mr. Simpson he peremptorily denies this Propostion he cites out Text of Scripture which is 1 John 5. There is a sinne unto death I do not say that he shall pray for it You say that that sinne doth not multiply persons but states and that a man as a man was to have been prayed for before such time as he sinned that sinne He objects and sayes that Jesus Christ knew a sort of men as men that were not to be prayed for But I conceive so farre as I am able to understand that you are both gone from the main question you began with which was whether God had given sufficient meanes of faith and salvation unto those Gentiles to whom he had not given the Gospel M. Good We have proceeded in this question by direct