An Answer to Blasphemous Cavillations by an Anabaptist, Section 15 – Section 16
THE ADVERSARIE.
An other argument gather they furth of gods prescience,The fiftenth section. but I will first borow an argument of them concerning the prescience of God. And then God willing I shall answere to theirs. Paul saieth: Those which God knew before, he also ordeined them before that they should be lyke fashioned vntounto the shape of his Sonne, that he might be the first begotten Sonne among many bretheren,The 2. argument. but God knew all men before,Rom. 8. Ergo be ordeined all men before,Reade the scriptures better & be ashamed of your argument. that they should be Christes brethren lyke fashioned vnt… him. The first parte of my argument is Paules saing, The seconde ye can not deny, and the conclusion is formallie inferred of bothe the partes. Labor either to solute my argument without any ambiguitie whereby ye may satisfie others, orels forsaik the error which it improueth.
ANSWER.
Because ye desire your argumēt to be soluted at your own request I will take som paine: God grant it may profit. Your argument conteineth in it self the fallax which is called of Equiuocation, for this word knowledge or this sentence: whom God did for knowe in the wordes of Paul, which be in your Maior or first propositīon, do not signifie the self same thing that these wordes, but God knew all men before, which you put in your minor or second proposition. And so because that there be foure termes which in the schooles be called scopae dissolutae, the argument is deceatfull and fals, althogh the forme appere good. Thus I trust in your own cōscience you think your argument fully and rightly soluted. but yet that neither ve shall hauehave occasion to bark againe, neither yet that the simple reader shall take paine to reade these vaine argumentes withou… all frute, I will adde somwhat more, and will plainely proue my solution to be good. In the first proposition I say, where saint Paul saieth, whom God for… knew,Rom. 9. the same he before ordeined: that the holie Gost meaneth of that fore knowledge of God which is ioy …ed with his eternall louelove, which before all tymes he did …ear to his elect, as of the wordes of Christ Iesus and of the wordes of the same Apostle in diuers places before is declared. And with this fore knowledge which is ioyned with his louelove by the which his elect were appointed to be made like fashioned to their head Christ Iesus,The difference of gode fore knowledge. did neuer God fore know nor foresee Cain, Iudas, nor none other reprobate to appertein to him. I do not denie but that as all thinges euer were present before the eies of his Maiestie, so did he both foreknow, foresee, and before ordein the ēd of all creatures: but other wies I say doeth God fore know his elect, of whō S. Paul onelyonly speaketh. If it doeth offend you that I affirme that God did neuer fore know yc reprobate as he did his elect: I hauehave my assurāce of Christ Iesus, of his own plaine wordes, sayng, to the fals prophetes I neuer knew you, depart from me ye workers of iniquitie. Note wel that Christ affirmeth that he neuer knew the fals prophetes, no not euen when they did prophecie, cast out deuilles, and did many wonderous thinges in the name of Christ If he had said I know you not, ye might hauehave shifted with this your accustomed cauillation, that was by reasō of their sinnes, which after they committed, but he leauing no doubt saieth I neuer knew you, ād therefor I fear not to affirme that God did neuer foreknow Iudas,Matth. 7. as that he knew Peter. Cōsider and be sober. Ye go forward to our argument and say.
THE ADVERSARIE.
There argument concerninge gods preascience is this.The six tenthe section. God knoweth al things before they be don…, gods presciēce or forknowledge is infallible, Ergo of necessitie all things must com to passe as they do: which being granted, they which perish, of necessitie they do perishe. If of necessitie then is it by gods ordinance, because so he willeth and so he hath ordeined: This argument semeth probable at the first blushe. But I pray the reader to mark first how these men put no difference betwext the foreknowledge of God and his will. for they suppose, that what so euer God foreseeth he also willeth, but there supposition is vntrue. for god foreseeth the death of the sinner, and yet he will not the death of the sinner, bu… rather that he repent and liue. Christ did foresee the destruction of Ierusalem, and yet did he not will it, for he wept and be waled it, God did foresee the fall and finall destruction of the Israelites, and yet wold he not it. As he witnesseth him self: saing wherefor willye die,Ezech. 18 O ye howse of Israel, seing I hauehave no pleasure in the death of him that dieth.
ANSWER.
What we do teach of gods prescience, of his prouidence and predestination, and how that his omnipotent will which we feare not to affirme to be the necessitie of all thinges doeth differ from stoicall necessitie, with the which ye burden vsus, we hauehave before declared, and therefor remitting the reader to the same place: I say to you. that if ye imagine in God a prescience,Reade the first sectiō. and foreknowledge, which is ydle and seperated from his will, that then ye fall into the blasphemie of Epicurus: and if that you say (as plainely ye do) that he foreseeth things to com, which he will not, that then ye denie the omnipotenci… of his power. Choose which you will, the veritie will conuince you. To proue that he foreseeth and knoweth many things to com, which he will not, ye adduce the place of Ezechiel, where God affirmeth, that God will not the death of a sinner, The weping of Christ vponupon Ierusalem, and the compleint of God against the house of Israel. To which I shortly answer at this tyme becaus that after we must hauehave to do with the same mater, that simply (that is hauing no further respect but to punishmēt onelyonly) God will neither the death of the sinner, neither yet the destruction of Ierusalem, nor of the house of Israell, but in respect of his glorie to be shewed in their iust punishement, and of his veritie and sentence to be approued, alwaies stable and constant, why that God shall not will both the death, and destruction to com vponupon the stubborne inobedient, I se nother absurditie to folow neither scripture repugning: but after in answering to your distinction which ye make the betwext gods will and his permission I purpose to entreat this mater more largely. You procede sayeng.