The Doctrine of the Saints Perseverance, Chapter 15 (1 of 3)

The Doctrine of the Saints Perseverance · Chapter 15 (1 of 3)

p. 324CAP. XV.

1. M▪ G's fift Argument for the Apostasy of true Believers. 2. The weight of this Argument taken from the sins of Believers. The difference between the sins of Believers and unregenerate persons proposed to consideration. 3. lames 1. 14. 15. The rise and progresse of Lust and Sinne. 4. The fountain of all sinne, in all persons is Lust. Rom. 7. 7. 5. Observations clearing the difference between Begenerate and unregenerate persons in their sinning, as to the common fountaine of all sinne: The first. 6. The second of the universality of Lust in the soule by nature. 7. The Third, in two inferences: the first, unregenerate men sinne with their whole consent. 8. The Second inference concerning the raigne of sinne, and raigning sinne. 9. The Fourth, concerning the universall possession of the Soule by renewing Grace. 10. The fift, that true Grace bears rule where ever it be. 11. Inferences from the former considerations. The first, that in every regenerate person there are diverse principles of all Morall operations. Rom 7. 19. 20. opened. 12. The second, that sinne cannot raigne in a Regenerate person. 13. The third, that Regenerate persons sinne not with their whole consent. 14. Answer to the Argument at the entrance proposed. Believers never sinne with their whole consent and willes. 15. M. G's attempt to remove the Answer. 16. His exceptions considered and removed. Plurality of Wills in the same person in the Scripture sence: of the opposition between flesh and spirit: that no Regenerate person sinnes with his full consent proved. 17. Of the Spirit and his Lustings in us. 18. The Actings of the spirit in us free, not suspended on any conditions in us. 19. The same farther manifested. 20. M. G's discourse of the first and second motions of the spirit considered. 21. The same considerations farther carried on. 22. Peter Martyrs Testimony considered▪ 23. Rom. 7. 19. 20. considered. 24. Difference between the opposition made to sin in persons Begenerate, and that in persons unregenerate farther argued. 25. Of the sence of Rom. 7. and in what sence Believers doe the works of the flesh. 26. The close of these considerations. 27. The Answer to the Argument at the entrance of the Chapter opened. The Argument new formed: the Major Proposition limited, and granted, and the Minor denied. 28. The proofe of the Major considered. Gal. 5. 21. Ephes. 5. 5. 6. 1 Cor: 6. 9. 10. 29. Believers how concerned in comminations. 30. Threatning proper to unbelievers for their sinnes. 31. Farther objections proposed and removed. 32. Of the progresse of Saints intempting to sinne. 33. The effect of Lust in tem ptations. 34. Difference between Regenerate and unregenerate persons as to the tempting of Lust, (1.) in respect of universality, (2.) of Power. 35. Objections Answered. 36. Whether Believers sinne only out of infirmity 37. Whether Believers may sinne our of Malice, and with deliberation. 38. Of the stare of Believers, who upon their sinne may be excommunicated. 39. 40. Whether the Body of Christ may be dis…embred. What body of Christ it is that is intended. 41. Mr G. thoughts to this purpose examined 42 M. G. discourse of the way whereby Christ keeps or may keep his members examined. 43. Members of Christ cannot become members of Satan: 1 Cor. 6. 15. considered. 44. of the sence and use of the word foreign. 45. Christ takes Members out of the power of Satan, gives up none to him. 46. Repetition of Regeneration asserted by the Doctrine of Apostasy. 47. The Repetition disproved. 48. M.G. notion of Regeneration examined at large and rebuked. 49. Relation between God and his Children indissoluble. 50. The farther progresse of Lust for the production of sinne, it draws oft, and entangles: drawing away what it is. 51. The distance between Regenerate and unregenerate persons in their being drawn away by Lust. 52. Farther description of him who is drawn away by Lust: and of the difference formerly mentioned. 53. Of Lusts enticing. 54. How farre this may be fall regenerate men. To do sinne Rom. 7. what it intendeth. 55. Lusts conceiving, wherein it consists. 56. Of the bringing forth of sinne, and how farre the Saints of God may proceed therein. 57. 1 Ioh. 3. 9. opened: the scope of the place discovered: 58. Vindicated. 59. The words farther opened. The proposition in the words universall: inferences from thence … 60. The subject of that Proposition considered, every one that is borne of God, what is affirmed of them: what meant by committing of sinne. 61. M. G. opposition to the sence of that expression given. Reasons for the confirmation of it. 62. M. G. Reasons against it, proposed and considered. 63. The farther Exposition of the word carried on: How he that is borne of God cannot sinne: severall kinds of impossibility. 64. M. G. attempt to Answer the Argument from this place. 65. Particularly examined. 66. The Reasons of the Proposition in the Text considered: of the seed of God abideth: the nature of that seed, what it is, wherein it consists. 6…. Of the abiding of this seed. 68. Of the latter part of the Apostles Reason, he is borne of God: our Argument from the words. 69. M. G. indeavour to evade that Argument: his exposition of the words removed. 70. Farther of the meaning of the word abideth. 71. The Close.

p. 325MR Goodwin's Fift Argument for the Saints Apostacy, §. 1.is taken from the Consideration of the sinnes which they have fallen into, or possibly may so do, and it is thus proposed. Sect. 20.

They who are in a capacity, or possibility of perpetrating the workes of the flesh, are in a possibility of perishing, and consequently in a possibility of falling away, and that finally from the Grace and favour of God, in case they be in an estate of this Grace and Favour at the present; But the Saints, or true Believers are in a possibility of perpetrating the workes of the flesh, and therefore also they are in a possibility of perishing, and so of falling away from the Grace and Favour of God, wherein at present they stand. The Major Proposition of this Argument, to wit, They who are in a possibility of perpetrating, or customarily acting the workes of the Flesh, are in a possibility of perishing, is clearely proved from all such Scriptures which exclude all workers of iniquity, and fulfillers of the Lusts of the flesh from the Kingdome of God; of which sort are many; Of the which saith the Apostle, speaking of the Lusts of the flesh, Adultery, Fornication, &c. I tell you, as I have also told you in times past, that they who do such things shall not inherit the Kingdome of God; so againe, For this ye know, that no Whoremonger or uncleane person, nor Covetous man, who is an Idolator, hath any Inheritance of the Kingdome of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vaine words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of Cod upon the Children of disobedience. yet againe, know ye not that the nnrighteous shall never inherit the Kingdome of God? Be not deceived, neither Fornicators, nor Idolaters shall inherit the Kingdome of God; from such passages as these, which are very frequent in the Scriptures, it is as cleare as the light of the Sunne at noone-day, That they who may possibly commit such sinnes as those specified, Adultery, Fornication, Idolatry, may as possibly perish and be for ever excluded the Kingdom of God.

Ans. §. 2.Because of all Arguments whatever used against the Truth we assert, this seemes to me to weare the best colours on its back, and to have its face best painted viz. with that plea of the Inconsistency of sinne with the Favour and acceptation of God seeming to have a tendency to caution Believers in their wayes and walkings, to be more carefull in watching against Temptations, I shall more largely insist on what the Lord hath been pleased to reveale concerning the sinnes & failings of such as he is yet pleased to accept in a covenant of Mercy, whom though he chastens and sorely rebukes, yet he gives not their Soules over unto death, nor takes his Loving kindnesse from them forever; now because the inside & strength of this Objection, consists in a comparison instituted between the sinnes of Believers, and the sinnes of unregenerate Persons, which being laid in the ballance are found of equall burdensomenes unto God, & therefore are in expectance of a like Reward from him, I shall in the first place, before I come in particular to answer the Argument proposed, manifest the difference that is between Regenerate persons, and Unregenerate in their sinning, and consequently also between their sinnes, wherein such principles shall be layd downe and proved, as may with an easy Application remove all that is added in the farther carrying on, and endeavoured vindication of the Argument in hand.

A foundation of this discourse we have laid in Iames. 1. 14. 15.§: 3. Put every man is tempted, saith the Holy Ghost, when he is drawn away of his own Lust, and enticed; Then when Lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sinne, and sinne when it is finished, bringeth forth death. The Holy-Ghost discovers the fountain of all p. 326sinne, and pursues it in the streames of it into the dead sea, whereinto it falls; All sinne whatever, is from temptation, that which tempts to sinne is the cause of it, and that which tempts to all sinne is the cause of all sinne; This Fountaine of sinne is here Discovered, the principle, proper, criminall cause of sinne, in the beginning of the 14. verse. The Adversative but, is exclusive of any other faulty cause of sinne, that should principally fall under our Consideration, especially of God, of whom mention was made immediately before; now this is affirmed to be every mans lust. The generall way and meanes that this Originall of all sinne useth for the production of it is also discovered, and that is Temptation: every mans owne lust tempts him; The progresse also it makes in carrying on of sin whereunto it tempts is farther described in the severall parts & degrees of it. 1. It drawes away and intices, & the persons towards whom it exerts this efficacy, are drawne away or inticed. 2. It conceives, Lust conceives, the subject being prepared, answering its drawing away and inticing, without more adoe, it conceives sinne, and then it brings it forth into Action; that is, either into open perpetration, or deliberate determination of its accomplishment, and then it finisheth sinne, or comes up to the whole worke that sinne tends to: Whereuuto is subjoyned the dismall end and issue of this progresse of sinne which is Death; Eternall Death is in the wombe of finished sinne and will be brought forth by it.

This being the progresse of sin from the first Rise which is Lust, to the last end which is Death the way and path that the best and most refined Unregenerate men in the world do never throughly forsake, though they may sometimes step out of it, or be stopt in it, a way wherein who ever walkes to the end, may be sure to find the end. I shall consider the severall particulars laid downe, and shew in them all at least the most materiall, the difference that is betweene Believers & Vnbelievers, whilest they do walke or may walke in this path, and then manifest where, and when all Saints breake out of it forever; so that they come not to the close thereof; and therein shall give a full Answer unto the whole strength and designe of the Argument in hand, which consisteth as was said in a comparison instituted between the sins and demerits of Believers, and Unbelievers.

1. The Fountaine, §. 4.principle & cause of all sin whatever in all persons whatever is Lust, every ones owne Lust is the cause of his owne sin; This is the mother, wombe, & fomes of sin, which Paul sayes he had not been acquainted withall but by the Law, Rom. 7. 7. Nay I had not knowne sin but by the Law, for I had not knowne Lust except the Law had said thou shalt not Covet; That which in the entrance he calls sin indefinitely, in the close he particularly termes Lust; as being the hidden secret cause of all sinne, and which once discovered swallowes up the thoughts of all other sin, it being altogether in vaine to deale with them, or to set a mans selfe in opposition to them, whilst this sinfull wombe of them is alive and prevalent; this is that which we call Originall sinne, as to that part of it which consists in the universall alienation of our hearts from God, and unconquerable, habituall, naturall inclination of them to every thing that is evill; for this sinne workes in us all manner of concupiscence Rom. 7. 8. This I say is the wombe, cause, and principle of sinne, both in Believers and Vnbelievers; The Roote on which the bitter fruit of it doth grow where ever it is; no man ever sinnes but 'tis from his owne lust. And in this there is an agreement between the sinnes of Believers, and others, they are all from the same Fountaine, yet not such an agreement but that there is a difference herein also; for the clearing whereof observe.

First that by nature this Lust, §. 5.which is the principle of sinne, is seated in all the facultyes of the Soule, receiving divers Appellations according to the p. 327variety of the subjects wherein it is; and is sometimes exprest in tearmes of Privation, Want and Deficiency, sometimes by Positive inclination to evill. In the Understanding tis Blindnesse, Darkenesse, Giddinesse, Folly, Madnesse. In the Will Obstinacy and Rebellion. In the Heart and Affections, Pride, Stubbornenesse, Hardnesse, Sensuality: In all Negatively and Privatively, Death: Positively, Lust, Corruption, Flesh, Concupiscence, Sinne, the Old man, and the like; There is nothing in the soule of a man that hath the least influence into any Action as Morall, but it is wholly possessed with this depraved vicious habit, and exerts it selfe alwayes, and only, in a suitablenesse thereunto.

Secondly thar this Lust hath so taken possession of men by Nature, that in reference to any Spirituall Act or duty they are nothing else but Lust and Flesh; §. 6.that which is borne of the flesh is flesh, John 3. 6. It is all so, it is all Spirituall Flesh; That is, it is wholly and habitually corrupt, as to the doing any thing that is good. If any thing in a man might seeme to be exempted, it should be his minde the seat of all those things which are commonly called the Relickes of the Image of God, but that also is flesh as the Apostle at large Asserts it Rom. 8. and enmity to God; Neither is it of any weight, which is Objected. That there is in Unregerate men, the knowledge of the Truth which they retaine in ungodlinesse, Rom. 1. 18. Conscience accusing, and excusing Rom 2. 14. The knowledge of sinne which is by the Law with sundry other endowments which they say doubtlesse are not flesh. I Answer, they are all flesh, in the sence that the Scripture useth that word; The Holy Ghost speakes of nothing in man, in reference unto any duty of Obedience unto God, but it is either Flesh or Spirit, these two comprehend every man in the world; every man is either in the flesh, or in the Spirit, Rom. 8. The utmost improvement of all naturall facultyes whatever, the most compleat subjection whereunto they are brought by convictions yet leaves the same impotency in them to Spirituall good, as they were borne withall the same habituall inclination to sinne, however entangled and hampered from going out to the Actuall perpetrating of it; neither are they themselves any thing the better, nor hath God any thing of that Glory by them, which ariseth from the willing Obedience of his Creatures.

Thirdly,§. 7. it being the state of every mans proper Lust, which is the Fountain of all sinne, two things will follow.

First, That in whomsoever it is, in its compasse and power as above described, as' tis in every unregenerate Man, how ever convinc'd of sinne, he sinnes with his full and whole consent; all that is within him consents to every sinne he commits; Unregenerate men sinne with their whole hearts and soules. In every act their carnall minds are not, will not be subject to the Law of God; their wills and all their Affections delight in sinne; and this because there is no principle in them, that should make any opposition to sinne, I meane such a spirituall opposition, as would really take off from their full consent; It is true Conscience repines, witnesses against sinne, reprooves, rebukes, excuses or causes; but Conscience is no reall principle of operation, but either a Judge of what is done, or to be done, or a morall inducer to doing or not doing; and whatever Conscience doth, however it tumultuate, rebuke, chide, perswade, trouble, cry, and the like, whatever conviction of the guilt of sinne may shew into the judgement, yet sinne hath the consent of the whole soule. Every thing that hath a reall influence into operation, consents thereto, originally and radically, how ever any principle may be dared by Conscience. To take off any thing from full consent, there must be something of a spirituall Repugnancy in the mind and will, which when Lust is thus enthroned, there is not.

p. 328Secondly, That sinne reigneth in such persons, Many have been the inquiries of Learned men about reigning of sinne. As What sinnes may be said to reigne,§. 8. and what not? Whether sinnes of ignorance may raigne, as well as sinnes against knowledge? What little sinnes may be said to reigne, as well as great? Whether frequent relapses into any sinne, prove that sinne to be reigning? Whether sinne may reigne in a Regenerate person? Or whether a Saint may fall into reigning sinne, whereabout Divines of great note and name have differed; all upon a false bottome and supposall; The Scripture gives no ground for any such inquiries or disputes, or Cases of Conscience, as some men have raised hereupon: And indeed I would this were the only instance, of mens creating Cases of Conscience, and answering them, when indeed, and in truth, there are no such things; so insnaring the Consciences of Men, and intangling more by their Cases, than they deliver by their Resolutions; The truth is, there is no mention of any reigning sinne, or the Reigning of any sinne in the whole Book of God, taking sinne for this or that particular sinne; But of the Reigne of this Indwelling originall Lust, or fountaine of all finne there is frequent mention. Whilest that holds its power and universality in the soule, and is not restrained, nor straitned by the Indwelling spirit of grace, with a new vitall principle of no lesse extent, and of more power than it, be the Actuall sinnes few or more, knowne or unknowne, little or great, all is one; sinne reignes, and such a person is under the power and dominion of sinne: so that in plain termes, to have finne reigne, is to be unconverted: and to have sinne not to reigne is to be converted, to have received a new principle of Life from above; This is evident from the 5. and 6. Chapter of the Epist. to the Romans, the seate of this Doctrine of reigning sinne; The opposition insisted on by the Apostle is between the Reigne of Sinne and Grace, and in pursuit thereof he manifests how true Believers are tanslated from the one to the other. To have sinne reigne is to be in a state of sinne; to have Grace reigne, is to be in a state of Grace. So Chapter 5. 21. %As sinne reigned unto death, so Grace reignes through Righteousnesse unto eternall Life by Jesus Christ our Lord; The sinne he speakes of is that whereof he treates in all that Chapter; the sinne of Nature, the Lust wherof we speake, this by nature reigneth unto Death, but when Grace comes by Jesus Christ, the soule is delivered from the power thereof, so in the whole 6. Chap. It is our change of state and Condition that the Apostle insists on in our delivery from the reigne of sinne, and he tells us, this is that that destroyes it, our being under Grace v: 14. Sinne shall not have dominion over you because you are not under the Law, but under Grace; Plainely then there are two Lords and Rulers, and these are Originall or Indwelling sinne and Grace or the Spirit of it; The first Lord the Apostle discovers with his entrance upon his Rule and Dominion, Chap. 5. and this all men by nature are under; The second he describes Chap. 6. which sets out the Rule & reigne of Grace in Believers by Jesus Christ. And then

Thirdly the place that both these Lords have in this life in a Believer, Cap. 7. This then is the only reigning sin & in whomsoever it is in its power & compas as it is in all unregenerate men, in them, & in them only doth sin reigne, & every sin they commit is with full consent, (as was manifested before) in exact willing Obedience to the soveraigne Lord that reignes in them.

Fourthly,§. 9. observe that the Grace, new Creature, Principle or Spirituall Life that is Given to, bestowed on, and wrought in all, and only Believers, be it in the lowest and most remisse degree that can be imagined, is yet no lesse universally spread over the whole soule, than the contrary habit and principle of Lust and sinne, whereof we have spoken; In the Understanding it is Light in the Lord, in the Will Life, in the Affections Love, Delight, &c. those p. 329being reconciled, who were alienated by wicked workes. Where ever there is any thing, the least of grace, there something of it is in every thing of the soule, that is a capable seat for good or evill habits, or dispositions; He that is in Christ is a new creature, 2 Cor: 5. 17. not renewed in one or other particular, he is a new Creature.

Fiftly, that where ever true Grace is, in what degree soever,§. 10. there it bears Rule; though sinne be in the same subject with it; As sinne reignes before grace comes, so Grace reignes when it doth once come: And the reason is, because sinne having the first Rule, and Dominion in the heart, abiding there, there is neither Roome nor place for Grace, but what is made by conquest. Now who ever enters into a possession by right of Conquest, what resistance soever be made, if he prevaile to a Conquest, he reignes. In every regenerate man, though Grace be never so weake, and Corruption never so strong, yet properly the Soveraignty belongs to Grace. Having entered upon the soule, and all the powers of it by Conquest so long as it abides there, it doth reigne; So that to say a Regenerate man may fall into reigning sinne, as it is commonly exprest, (though as we have manifested no sinne reignes, but the sinne of Nature, as no good Act reigneth, but the spirit and habit of Grace) and yet continue Regenerate, is all one as to say, he may have, and not have true Grace at the same time.

Now from these considerations,§. 11. some farther inferences may be made; First, That in every regenerate person, there are in a spirituall sence, two Principles of all his actings: Two Wills; There is the Will of the Flesh, and there is the Will of the Spirit; a Regenerate man is spiritually, and in Scripture expression two men, a new man, and an old: an inward man and a body of Death; and hath two Wills, having two Natures, not as Naturall faculties, but as Morall principles of operation; and this keepes all his actions as Morall, from being perfect, absolute, or compleate in any kind. He doth good with his whole heart upon the account of sincerity, but he doth not good with his whole heart upon the account of perfection; and when he doth evill, there is still a non-submitting, an unconsenting principle; this the Apostle complains of, and declares, Rom. 7. 19. 20. The good that I would, I doe not, but the evill which I would not, that doe I; now if I doe that I would not, it is no more I that doe it, but sinne that dwelles in mee; I find then a Law, that when I would doe good, evill is present with mee; For I delight in the Law of God after the inward man: There is an [I] and an [I] at opposition, a will and not willing; a doing and not doing; a delighting and not delighting, all in the same person; so that there is this difference at the entrance, between what sinne soever of Regenerate persons, and others, though the principle of sinning be the same for the kind and nature of it, in them and others; all sinne, every mans sinnes, be who he will be, believer or unbeliever, being tempted by his own Lust: yet that Lust possesseth the whole soule, and takes in the vertuall consent of the whole man, notwithstanding the controwle and checks of conscience, the light of the judgement, in him that is unregenerate; but in every Regenerate person, there is an unconsenting principle, which is as truly the man himselfe, that doth not concurre in sinne, that doth expressely dissent from it, as the other is, from whence it flowes.

Secondly,§. 12. That sinne neither can, doth, nor ever shall reigne in Regenerate Persons. The reason of this I acquainted you with before, and the Apostle thinks this a sufficient proofe of this assertion, because they are under grace. Rom. 7. 14. Whilest the principle of Grace abides in them, which reignes where ever it be, or the free acceptance of God in the Gospell is towards them, it is impossible upon the account of any actuall sinne whatever, whereinto p. 330they may fall, that sinne should reigne in them: nothing gives Sinne a Reigne and dominion, but a totall defect of all true grace whatever, not only as to the exerting it selfe, but as to any habituall relicts of it; It may be overwhelmed sometimes with Temptations and corruptions, but it is Grace still, as the least sparke of fire is fire, though it should be covered with never so great an heape of ashes, and it reignes then.

Thirdly, That Regenerate persons sinne not with their whole and full consent, §. 13.Consent may be taken two wayes; First Morally, for approbation of the thing done; so the Apostle saies, that in the inward man, he did consent to the Law, that it was good. Rom. 7. 16. that is, he did approve it as such, like it, delight in it as good; and thus a Regenerate man never consents to sinne; no nor unregenerate persons neither, unlesse they are such as being past feeling are given up to work lasciviousnesse with greedinesse; a Regenerate person is so farre from thus consenting to sinne, that before it, in it, after it, he utterly condemnes, disallowes, hates it as in himselfe, and by himselfe committed. Secondly, Consent may be taken in a Physicall sence, for the concurrence of the commanding, and acting principles of the soule unto its operations: and in this sence an unregenerate man sinnes with his full consent, and his whole will; a Regenerate man doth not, cannot doe so; For though there is not in that consent to sinne, which his will, inclined by the remaining disposition of sinne in it, doth give, an actuall sensible Reaction of the other principle, yet there is an expresse, not consenting; and by the power that it hath in the soule, (for habits have power in, and over the Subjects wherein the are) it preserves it from being wholly ingaged into sinne; and this is the great intendment of the Apostle, Rom. 7. 19 20. 21. 22.

From what hath been spoken will easily appeare what Answer may be given to the former Argument, to wit, That notwithstanding any sinnes that either the Scripture or the experience of men, do evince that the Saints may fall into, yet that they never sinne or perpetrate sinne with their full and whole consent, whereby they should be lookt upon, in and under their sinnes, in the same state and condition with unregenerate persons, in whom sinne reigneth, committing the same sinne, and how insufficient any thing produced by Mr Goodwin in defence of the argument layd downe at the entrance of this Chapter, is to remove the Answer given unto it from Believers not sining with their whole consent may easily be demonstrated; This he thus proposeth.

Some to mainetaine this position, That all the sinnes of true Believers are sinnes of infirmity, lay hold on this shield, such men, they say never sinne with their whole wills, or with full consent, therefore they never sinne but through infirmity; that they never sinne with full consent, they conceive they prove sufficiently from that of the Apostle, for the good that I would I do not, but the evil that I would not that I do, Now if I do that I would not it is no more I that do it, but sinne that dwelleth in me. I Answer, first that the Saints cannot sinne but with their whole wills or full consents is undeniably proved by this consideration; viz. Because otherwise there should be not only a plurality or diversity, but also a contrariety of wills in the same persō, at one & the same instant of time, viz. when the supposed act of evill is produced, now it is an impossibility of the first evidence that there should be a plurality of acts & these contrary one to the other in the same subject or agent, at one or the same iustant of time; it is true between the first movings of the flesh in a man towards the committing of the sinne, and the compleating of the sinne by an Actuall and Externall patration of it, there may be successively in him not only a plurality but even a contrariety of Volitions or Motions of the will according to what the Scripture speaketh concerning the flesh lusting against the Spirit, and the p. 331Spirit against the flesh; But when the flesh having prevailed in the combate, bringeth forth her desire into act the Spirit ceaseth from his act of Lusting; otherwise it would follow that the flesh is greater aud stronger in her lusting; than the Spirit of God in his; and that when the flesh lusteth after the perpetration of such or such a sinne, the Spirit as to the hindering of it lusteth but in vaine, which is contrary to that of the Apostle, greater is he that is in you (speaking as tis cleare of the Spirit of God unto true Believers) than he that is in the world, meaning Sathan and all his Auxiliaries Sinne, Flesh, Corruption.

Ans. What we intend by the Saints not sinning with their whole wills hath been declared;§. 16. that there is not a consistency in the explanation we have given Mr Goodwin asserts; because it would inferre a plurality yea a contrariety of wills in the same person at the same time; That there is a plurality yea a contrariety of wills in the Scripture sence of the expression of the will of a man was before from the Scripture declared; not a plurality of wills in a Physicall sence, as the will is a naturall faculty of the soule, but in a Morall and Analogicall sence as 'tis taken for a habit or principle of good or evill; The will is a naturall faculty, one nature hath one will, in every Regenerate man there are two natures, the new or divine, and the old or corrupted. In the same sence there are in him two wills as was declared; But saith he It is an impossibility of the first evidence that there should be a plurality of Acts in the same subject at the same time and these contrary one to another. But

1. If you intend acts in a Morall Consideration, unlesse you adde about the same Object which you do not, this Assertion is so farre from any evidence of truth that it is ridiculously false; May not the same person love God and hate the Divell at the same time. But

2. How passe you so suddenly from a plurality of wills to a plurality of acts; by the will we intend in the sence wherein we speak of it an habit, not any act; i.e. The will as habitually invested with a new principle & not as actually willing from thence, & by vertue thereof; Arminius from whom our Author borrowes this Discourse fell not into this Sophystry, he tels you There cannot be contrary wills or volitions about the same Act; But is it with M.G. or Arminius an impossibility that there should be a mixt action partly voluntary, & partly involuntary; actions whose principles are from without by perswasion may be so, a mans throwing his goods in the Sea to save his owne life; Now the principles whereof we speak Flesh & Grace are internall & contrary, & shall not the actions that proceed from a faculty wherein such contrary principles have their residence, be partly voluntary, partly involuntary.

3. But he tells you, That though there might be lusting of the Spirit against the flesh before the act of sinne, yet when it comes to the acting of it then it ceaseth & so the act is wrought with the whole will.

First though this were so, yet this doth not prove but that the Action is mixt and not absolutely and wholly voluntary; Mixt Actions are so esteemed from the antecedent deliberation and dissent, though the will be at length prevailed upon thereunto, and I have shewed before that in the very action there is a vertuall dissent, because of the opposite principle that is in the will. But

Secondly, How doth it appeare that the Spirit doth not lust against the flesh though not to a prevalency even in the exertion of the acts of sinne; In every good act that a man doth, because evil is present with him, though the prevalency be of the part of the Spirit, and the principle of Grace, yet the flesh also with its lustings doth alwayes in part corrupt it; Thence are all the spots, staines, and imperfections of the holy things and dutyes of the Saints; and if the flesh in its lusting will immix it selfe with our good Actions to their defilement p. 332and impairing why may not the Spirit in the ill, not immix its selfe and its lustings threwith, but beare off from the full influence of the will into them which otherwise it would have.

But saith he If the spirit doth not cease lusting before the flesh bring forth the act of sinne, then is the Spirit conquered by the flesh, contrary to that of the Apostle, 1 John. 4. 4. %Stronger is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. But

First, If from hence the flesh must be though & conceived to be stronger than the Spirit, because it prevailes in any act unto sin, notwithstanding the contending of the Spirit, how much more must it be judged to prevaile over it and to conquer it if it cause it utterly to cease, and not to strive at all; He that restraines an other that he shall not oppose him at all, hath a greater power than he who conquers him in his resistance; But why doth Mr Goodwin feare least the flesh should be asserted to be stronger in us than the Spirit? Is not his whole designe to prove that it is, or may be so, so much stronger and more prevalent than it, that whereas it is confessed on all hands, that the Spirit doth never wholly conquer the flesh that it shall not remaine in the Saints in this life, yet that the flesh doth wholly prevaile over the Spirit and conquer it to an utter expulsion of it, out of the hearts of them in whom it is.

Secondly, In the prevalency of the flesh, it is not the Spirit himselfe that is conquered, but only some motions & actings of him in the heart; Now though some particular actings and motions of his may not come out eventually unto successe yet if he generally beares Rule in the heart, he is not to be said (even as in us and acting in us) not to be stronger than the flesh; He is, as in us, on this account, said to be stronger than he that is in the world, because notwithstanding all the opposition that is against us, he preserveth us in our state and condition of Acceptation with God and walking with him with an upright heart in good workes and dutyes for the most part, though sometimes the flesh prevailes unto sinne, from which yet he recovers us by Repentance.

Thirdly, To speake a little to Mr Goodwin's sence; By the Spirits insufficiency it is manifest from the Text urged and from what followes in the same place, that he intends not a Spirituall vitall principle in the will, having its residence there, with its contrary principle the flesh (perhaps he will grant no such thing) but the Spirit of God himselfe. How now doth this Spirit lust? Not formally doubtlesse, but by causing us so to do; and how doth it do that in Mr Goodwin's judgement? Meerely by perswading of us so to do; so that to have the flesh prevaile against the Spirit, is nothing in his sence, but to have sinne prevaile, and the motives of the flesh above the motives used by the Spirit, which may be done, and yet the Spirit continue unquestionably stronger than the flesh.

Fourthly, The summe is, If the Spirit and the flesh, Lust and Grace, may be lookt on as habituall qualityes and principles in the wills of the same persons so that though a man hath but one will, yet by reason of these contrary qualityes, He is to be esteemed as two diverse principles of operation, it is evident that having contrary inclinations continually, the will hath in its actings a Relation to both these principles, so that no sinne is commited by such an one with his whole will and full consent; That contrary qualityes in a Remisse degree may be in the same subject is knowne, Lippis & Tonsoribus; These adverse principles the Flesh and Spirit, are as those contrary qualityes of the same subject; and the inclinations, yea and the elicite acts of the will, are of the same nature with them; so that in the same act they may both be working though not with equall efficacy. Notwithstanding any thing then said to the contrary, p. 333it appeares that in the sinnes which the Saints fall into, they do not sinne with their whole wills and full consent; which of it selfe is a sufficient Answer to the foregoing Argument.

Sect. 25. containes a discourse,§. 17. too long to be imposed upon the Reader by a transcription: There are three parts of it, the first rendring a Reason, whence it is, that if the Spirit be stronger than the flesh, yet the flesh doth often prevaile in its lustings.

The second, The way of the Spirits returne, to act in us after its motions have been rejected.

The third endeavours a proofe of the Proposition denied, That the Saints sinne with their full and whole consent, by the example of David.

For the first, he tells you, That the spirit acts not to the utmost efficacy of its vigour and strength, but only when his preventing motions are entertained: and Seconded, with a suitable concurrence in the hearts and wills of men: through a deficiency, and neglect whereof, he is said to be grieved, and quenched: i. e. to cease from other actings, or movings in men. This Truth, is the ground of such, and such sayings, in the sayings of Paul: for if you live after the flesh, ye shall dye: but if ye through the spirit, doe mortify the deeds of the Body, ye shall live: for as many as are led by the spirit of God, they are the Sonnes of God, &c.

Ans. The Spirit here intended by M. Goodwin, is the Holy and Blessed spirit of Grace. What his actings to the just efficacy of his vigour and strength are M. Goodwin doth not explaine. nor indeed notwithstanding the seeming significacy of that expression is able; It must be to act, either as much as he can, or as much as he will. That the Holy Spirit in opposing sinne, acts to the utmost extent of his Omnipotency in any, I suppose will not be affirmed. If it be as much as he will, then the sence is, he will not in such cases, act as much as he will; what that signifies, we want some other expressive phrase to declare. To let this passe; let us see in the next place, what his actings to this just efficacy are suspended upon, it is them in cafe, his first preventing motions be received, and seconded.

But then secondly; What are these first preventing motions of the spirit?§. 18. And what is it to entertaine them with a suitable concurrence of the Will? For the First, M. Goodwin tells us in this Section, they are motions of a coole and soft inspiration; such clowdy expressions, in a thing of this moment, are we forced to embrace: preventing motions of the spirit, are either Internall Physicall Acts in, with, and upon the Wills of men, working in them to will and to doe, (called preventing from the actings of the wills themselves) or they are Morall insinuations, and perswasions to good, according to the Analogy of the Doctrine M. Goodwin hath espoused: it is the latter only, that are here intended. The preventing motions of the spirit, are his Morall perswasions of the Will, to the good proposed to its consideration.

See then in the next place, what it is to second, & entertane these motions with a sutable concurrence in the heart and Will; Now this must be, either to yeeld Obedience to these motions, and to doe the good perswaded unto, or something else; if any thing else, we desire to know of M. Goodwin, what it is, and wherein it consists; if it be to doe the good perswaded too, then what becomes (I pray you) of those subsequent Helps, which are suspended upon this obedience, when the thing it selfe is already performed, which their help and assistance is required unto: They may well be called subsequent motions, which are never used nor applyed, but when the things, whereunto they move, and provoke, are before hand accomplished and performed, yea they are suspended on that condition.

p. 334Farther wherein do these subsequent helps as it is expressed, which move at a more high, and glorious rate consist? We have had it sufficiently argued already to a thorough conviction of what is Mr Goodwins judgment in this matter; viz. That he acknowledgeth no operations in, or upon the wills of men, but what are Morall, by the way of perswasion; contending to the utmost efficacy of his vigour, and strength in disputing; that there is an inconsistency between Physicall internall operations, in or upon the Will of men, and Morall exhortations, or perswasions, as to the production of the same effect; This then is the frame of this fine Discourse. If upon the Spirits first perswasion to good, men yeild Obedience and do it accordingly, the Spirit will then with more power, and vigour, move them when they have done it, and perswade them to doe it; That this discourse of his doth readily administer occasion, and advantage to retort upon him his third Argument formerly considered, of imposing incoherent and inconsistent reasonings, and actings upon God in his dealings with men, the intelligent Reader will quickly find out; and it were an easy thing to erect a Theater, and upon Mr Goodwins principles, to personate the Almighty, with an incongruous, and incoherent discourse; but we feare God.

Thirdly, That the Spirit is grieved with the sinnes of Believers, and their walking unworthily of, or not answerable to, the grace they have received, is cleare. (Ephesians 4. 31.) The Apostle admonisheth Believers to abstaine from the sinnes he there enumerates, and consequently others of the like import, having put on, and learned Christ, unto sanctification, that they doe not grieve the Spirit, from whom they have received that great mercy, and priviledge of being sealed to the day of Redemption; But that therefore the subsequent and more effectuall motions of the spirit, are not free as the first, but supended on our performance of that, which he first moves unto, and so consequently, that there is neither first our second motion of the Spirit, but may be rendred uselesse, and fruitlesse, or be for ever prevented, is an Argument not unlike that of the Papists, Peter feed my sheep, therefore the Pope is head of the Church.

The ensuing discourse also is not to be passed without a little Animadversion; §. 20.thus then he proceeds. Believers (saith he) doe then mortify the deeds of the body by the spirit, when they joyne their Wills unto his, in his preventing motions of grace, and so draw, and obtaine farther strength, and assistance from him, in order to the great, and difficult work of mortification, in respect of which concurrence also with the spirit in his first, and more gentle applications of himselfe to them, they are said to be led by the Spirit, as in their comportments with him, in his higher, and farther application, they become filled with the spirit, according to the expression of the Apostle, Be ye filled with the spirit, i.e. follow the spirit close in his present motions, and suggestions within you, and you shall be filled with him, i.e. ye shall find him moving and assisting you upon all occasions at a higher and more glorious rate.

Ans. First, what this joyning of our Wills of the spirit is, was in part manifested before; The Will of the spirit is, that we be mortified. His motions hereunto are his perswasions, that we be so; To joyne our Wills to his, is in our Will, to answer the Will of the spirit; that is, upon the spirits motions we mortify our selves. By this also (he tells us) we draw or obtaine farther strength, or assistance from the spirit, for that worke which we have done already; but how so? why he tells you afterward, that this is the Law of the Spirit: It seems then, that by doing one thing, we obtaine or procure the assistance of the spirit for another, and that by a Law; I aske by what Law? by the Law of workes? by that Law the Apostle tells you, that we doe not at all receive the spirit, therefore by a parity of Reason, we obtaine not any farther p. 335supplies from him, by that Law; By the Law of Faith, or Grace? that Law knows nothing of such termes, as that we should by any acting of ours, procure the Holy Spirit of God, which he freely bestowes, according to the maine tenour of that Law. Farther; How is this second grace obtained, and what is the Law of the Spirit therein? is it obtained ex congruo, or ex condigno? produce the Rule of Gods proceeding with his Saints, or any of the sonnes of men, in the matter of any gratious behovement of his, and you will out-doe what ever your Predecessors, whether Pelagians, Papists, Arminians, or Socinians, could yet attaine unto. Our Lord hath told us, that without him we can doe nothing: yea all our sufficiency is of God, and without him we cannot think a good thought; that he workes in us to will and to doe; not only beginning, but perfecting every good worke, fulfilling in us, all the good pleasure of his goodnesse, and the work of Faith with power, ascribing the whole of the great work of Salvation to Himselfe, and his Holy Spirit, working freely and gratiously, as he wills, and pleaseth; Of this order of his dealing with men, that his first, or preventing Grace should be free, but his subsequent Grace procured by us, and bestowed on us, according to our working, and cooperation with his first grace, invented by Pelagius, Iulianus, and Celastinus, and here introduced a new by M. Goodwin, he informes us nothing at all. In briefe, this whole discourse, is the meere Pelagian figment, wrapt up in generall clowdy expressions, with allusions to some Scripture Phrases (which prophane, as well as erring spirits are prone to) concerning the bestowing of the Grace of God, according to the differing deportments, and deservings of men, differencing themselves from others, and in comparison of them, holding out, what they have not received.

But Secondly,§. 21. to Answer the first and gentle motions of the spirit, is to be led by him, and then we shall be filled by the spirit; But how doth M. Goodwin prove, that to be led by the spirit, is to answer his first gentle motions, and thereby to obtaine his farther, and more glorious actings and perswasions? Is it safe, thus to make bold with the word of God? or is not this to wrest it, as ignorant, and unstable men doe unto perdition? Saints, being led by the spirit of God, and walking after the spirit, are in Rom: 8. expressions of that Effectuall sanctification exerting it selfe in their conversation, and walking with God, which the spirit of God worketh in them, and which is their duty, to come up unto, in opposition to living, or walking after the flesh. If this now be attained, and the Saints come up unto it, antecedently to the subsequent Grace of the Spirit, what is that subsequent grace, which is so gloriously expressed, and wherein doth it consist? Neither doth that expression of led by the Spirit, hold out the concurrence, or comportment of their Wills, as it is phrased, with the gentle motion of the spirit, but the powerfull and effectuall Operation of the spirit, as to their Holinesse, and walking with God; foreign, is not, they comport, or concurre with the Spirit in his motions, but by the spirit, they are acted, and carried out to the things of God: Neither hath this any relation to, or coherence with that of the Ephesians 5. 18. %Be filled with the spirit, neither is there any such intendment in the expression, as is here intimated of a promise of receiving more of the spirit, on condition of that compliance, concurrence, and comportance with his motions, as is intimated. That the spirit is sometimes taken for his Graces, sometimes for his Gifts, habitually, sometimes for his actuall operations, is known; The Apostle in that place disswading the Ephesians from turning aside to such carnall, sinfull Refreshments, as men of the world went out unto, bids them, not be drunke with Wine, wherein is excesse, but to be filled with the Spirit: to take their refreshment in the joyes of the spirit, speaking to themselves in Psalmes and Hymnes and spirituall Songs, v. p. 33620. Could I once imagine that M. Goodwin had the least thought, that indeed there was any thing in the Scripture, looking towards his intendment in the producing of it, I should farther manifest the mistake thereof; To play thus with the word of God, is a liberty we dare not make use of yet.

Thirdly he concludes That the reason why Believers are overcome by the Lustings of the flesh is not because the Spirit is not stronger than the flesh, but because men have more will to harken to the Lusts of the Flesh, than to the Spirit.

Fortunam Priami cantabo, & nobile bellum.

This is the issue of all the former swelling Discourse, mens sinnes are from their owne willes, and not because the Spirit is not stronger than the flesh; And who ever doubted it, the Conclusion you were to prove, is, That Believers sinne with their whole will and full consent of their wills, and that the new principle that is in them, doth not cause their wills to decline from acting in sinne to the just efficacy of all their strength and vigour; But of this foreign, for the insinuation in that expression of the Will hearkening to the lusts of the flesh, and not the lusting of the Spirit, in a sovereigne indifferency to both, and a liberty for the performance of either, in a way exclusive of good, or vicious habituall Principles of operation in the will it selfe, I shall not now divert to the consideration of.

What else remaines in this Section,§. 22. either doth not concerne the businesse in hand, as the fine notions of the Spirits returne to move Believers when his motions have been rejected, with the manner, whereof according to his conception, must be afterwards considered apart, as the fall of David into Adultery and Murther; if there be need to go forth to the consideration of his examples and instances: and therefore I shall not longer insist upon it; only the close of it consisting of an inference made from some words of Peter Martyr deserves consideration; VponUpon Davids sinne (saith he) Peter Martyr, makes this observation, That the Saints themselves being once fallen into sinne, would alwayes remaine in the pollution of it, did not God by his mighty Word bring them out of it; which saying of Martyr clearely also implyes that the Saints many times sinne with their whole wills and full consents, because were any part of their wills bent against the commiting of the sinne at the time, when it is committed, they would questionlesse returne to themselves and repent immediately after the beat and violence of the Lust being over, by reason of the satisfaction that hath been given thereunto.

Ans. The close insinuation in Peter Martyr's words, of the Saints sinning with their whole wills, and the Logicke of Mr Goodwin's inference from them I believe is very much hidden from the Reader; To the Theology of it, I say, that the Saints foreign, do immediately returne to God by Repentance, (as Peter did) upon their surprisalls into sinne; nor have they any rest in a condition, of the Eclipse of the countenance of God from them, as upon sinne it is alwayes more or lesse; of Davids particular case, mention may afterwards be made; But the proofe, that they sinne with their whole wills and full consent because they would continue in sinne, did not the Lord relieve and deliver them by his word and Grace, is admirable; I would adventure to cast this Argument into as many shapes, as it is tolerably capable of, had I the least hope to cause it to appeare any way Argumentatives; we deny then that Believers have any such power habitually residing in them, as whereby without any new supplyes of the Spirit or concurrence of actuall Grace; they can effectually and eventually recover themselves from any sinne whatever; Which supplyes of the Spirit, and Grace, we say and have proved are freely p. 337promised to them in the covenant of Graces; But what will here follow to the supportment of Mr Goodwin's Hypothesis, that therefore in all their sinnes or in any of their sinnes, they sinne with the full and whole consent of their wills, I suppose he alone knowes.

Sect. §. 2326. He endeavoures to take off that of the Apostle Rom. 7. 19, 20. from appearing against him in this cause of the Saints finning with their whole wills and consents; not not-willing the things they do, to this end he tells us That when the Apostle saith the evill which I would not that I do, his meaning is not that he did that which at the same time, that he did it, he was not willing either in whole or in part to do, but that he sometimes did that upon a surprisall by temptation or through incogitancy, which he was not habitually willing or disposed in the inward man to do; But this no wayes implyes but that at the time when he did the evill he speakes of, he did it with the full and entire consent of his will.

Ans. 1. It is probable the Apostle knew his owne meaning, and also how to expresse it, having so good a teacher to that end and purpose as he had; now he assures us in the person of a Regenerate man that as what He would He did not, so what He did He would not, He hated it v. 15, 16. And againe he did that which he would not, and therein consented to the Law by his not willing of that he did) that it was good; which whether it expresse not a Renitency of the will, to that which was done in part, and so farre as to make the Action it selfe remisse and not to enwrappe the whole consent of the will, he farther declares v. 17. telling us that there is a perfect unconsenting I, or internall principle in the very doing of evill; Is is no more I that do it, but sinne that dwelleth in me.

2. The Apostle doth not say, what he was not habitually willing to, but what he was habitually unwilling to; that is, what the bent of his will lay habitually against, having actuall inclinations, and elicite acts alwayes to the contrary, though sometimes overcome; Neither in his discoursing of it, doth he mention at all the surprisall of sin upon incogitancy, & inadvertency but the constant frame & temper of a regenerate man, upon the powerfull acting, & striving of the principle of lust and sin dwelling in him, and remaining with him; which saith the Apostle, doth often carry them out to do those things, which are contrary to the principle of the inward man, which habitually condemnes and actually wills not, or rather nills the things that are so done, even in their doing. And this doth manifest sufficiently that when he did the evil he speakes of; he did it not with the full and entire consent of his will as men do, in whom there is no such principle opposite to sinne, and sinning, as is in him that is Regenerate; there being very much taken off by the habituall principle of Grace that is in them, and its constant inclinations to the contrary.

But he farther argues, §. 24.If we shall affirme, that the contrary bent or motions of his will, at other times, is a sufficient proofe, that when he did the evill, we speake of, he did it not with his whole will, or fulnesse of consent, in such a sence is a distinguishing Character betwixt men Regenerate and unregenerate, we shall bring Herod, and Pilate, and probably Judas himselfe into the list, of men Regenerate with a thousand more whom the Scripture knowes not, under any such name or relation; viz. all those whose Judgments and consciences stand against the evill of the wayes and practises wherein they walke.

And this he proves at large to the end of the Section, in the instance of Herod, and Pilate proceeding against their owne Judgements and Consciences in the killing of John and of our Saviour.

p. 338Ans. First, we do not only assert a contrary bent and inclination in the Wills of Believers at other times, but also that in and under the prevalency of indwelling sinne, there is in them an I that doth it not, and a not-willing it from a Principle, though by reason of the present prevalency of the other, its actings and stirrings are not so sensibly perceived. So that though they prevaile not, to the totall prevention of the will, from exerting the Act of sinne, yet they prevaile to the impairing, weakening, and making remisse its consent thereunto.

Secondly, The residue of this Paragraph is intolerably Sophisticall, confounding the Renitencie of the inward man, the principle of grace that is in the wills of Believers, with the Convictions of the judgements and consciences of unregenerate persons, and their striving against sinne on that account. The judgements and consciences of wicked men, tell them what they ought to do, and what they ought not to doe without respect to the principle in their wills that is predominant. But the Apostle mentions the actings of the will it selfe, from its owne regenerate principle. We wholly deny that any unregenerate man hath any vitall principle in his will not consenting to sinne, what ever the dictates of his judgement and conscience may be; or how effectuall soever to prevaile unto an abstinence from sinne. To discover the differences that are between the contest, that is between the wills in unregenerate men, wholly set upon sinne, on the one hand, and their judgements and Consciences enlightned to an apprehension and approving of better things on the other, and the contest that is between the Flesh, and Spirit lusting to contrary things, in the same will, as it is in regenerate men, is a common place; that I shall not goe forth unto. We grant then, that in unregenerate men, there may be, there is, and was in some degree, perhaps in Herod, in Pilate, a conviction of conscience and judgement, that the things they doe are evill; but say withall, that all this being forraigne to their wills, it hinders not but that they sinne with the full uncontrouled consent of their wills, which are at perfect Liberty, or rather in perfect bondage unto sinne. That the Spirit should lust against the flesh, and the flesh against the spirit, both in the same will. (as it appears they doe. Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. for the fruits that they both bring forth, are acts of the will) in any unregenerate man, we deny; and this is that, and not the former, which abates, and takes off from the wills consent to sinne.

He concludes the whole; § 25.And to the passage of the Apostle, mentioned Rom. 7. I answer farther, that when he saith, the evill which I would not, that doe I, he doth not speake of what he alwaies, and in all cases did, much lesse of what was possible for him to doe, but of what he did ordinarily and frequently, or of what was very incident unto him, through the infirmity of the flesh, viz. through inconsideratenesse and anticipation by temptations to doe such things, which when he was in a watchfull and considerate posture, and from under the malignant influence of a temptation, he was altogether averse unto: now what a man doth ordinarily, is one thing, and what he doth sometimes, and in some particular cases, especially what it is possible for him to doe is another: that true believers whilest such, ordinarily sinne not upon worse termes, then those mentioned by the Apostle concerning his sinning, I easily grant; but it no waies followeth from hence, that therefore they never sinne upon other termes, much lesse that it is impossible that they should sinne upon others; and thus we see all things throughly and impartially argued, and debated to and fro, that even true Believers themselves as well as others, may do those works of the flesh, which exclude from the Kingdome of God, and that inrespect thereof, they are subject to this exclusion as well as other men.

The summe of this part of the Reply is, that what Paul speaks is true, of the ordinary course of Believers, but not of extraordinary surprisals; this seems I p. 339say to be the tendency of it, though the direct sence of the whole is not so obvious to mee: by that expression, the evill that I would not, that I doe, you intend either the expression of, he would not, or, that he did; if the latter; then you say, he did not sinne ordinarily and frequently, but only upon surprisalls, which is freely granted, but is not at all to your purpose, but rather much against it; If you attend that part of it, which holds out his Renitency against the evill he did, in the expression of I would not, then you say, it was not ordinary with the Apostle to nill the evill that he did, but in case of surprisall to sinne, which I believe is not intended; for is it credible, that any one should think that in the ordinary course of a mans walking there should be no opposition made to sinne, the falling whereinto men are liable, but upon surprizalls and anticipations by temptation, as it is phrased there should. Nor is it on the other side, that he intends the things that he did ordinarily, but was surprized by temptation, then it might be otherwise. But first, is a Saint to be supposed to sinne ordinarily, to sinne not prevailed on by temptation? is not all sinne from temptation? doe they sinne actually but upon the surprisall of temptation? to impose this upon the Apostle, that he should say truly for the most part, or in my ordinary walking, I doe not sinne, but withall, I will it not, but when I am surprized with temptations, then it is otherwise with mee, there is no Renitency in my will to sinne, is doubtlesse to wrong him; He doth not limit his not willing of the evill he did to any consideration whatever, but speakes it generally, as the constant state and condition of things with him.

Secondly, in the beginning of this Section, the nilling of sinne, was antecedent to the sinne: here, it is something that may be allowed in ordinary cases, but not at all in extraordinary; so that these two expositions put together amount to thus muh. Ordinarily the Apostle antecedent to any sinning before the lusting of the spirit ceased, did not will the thing that he did, which was evill, but in case of temptation it was not so; that is antecedently to his acting of that which was evill, he had no opposition in the inward man unto it, nor lusting of the spirit against it, which how it can be made good against him, whose heart is upright, and who hates every evill way, I know not.

Thirdly it is confessed that ordinarily Believers sinne at no worse a rate than that expressed by the Apostle; But what doth that containe? If would not, be referred to their doing of sinnes, then you grant that which all this while you have endeavoured to oppose, and are reconciled to your owne contradiction in the first evidence sinne cannot ordinarily or extraordinarily be committed but by an act of the will, and yet ordinarily, there is a dissent of the will also thereunto. If you adhere to your other former interpretation that the willing against sin committed, is antecedent to the commitment of it, & layd a sleepe before the perpetration of any sinne, then this also is imposed on you, that there are sinnes whereunto they may be surprised by temptations, that antecedently to the commitment of them, they do not, not-will; that as to them, the Spirit lusteth not against the flesh; which is notoriosly false; for the flesh lusteth against the Spirit and all the wayes of it and all the fruits thereof, and the Spirit lusteth against the flesh, with all its wayes and fruits.

Fourthly it appeares then that this being the description of a Regenerate man, which the Apostle gives, as to indwelling sinne, and all the fruits thereof, that it is most ridiculous to exempt his frame in respect of such sinnes as they may fall into by surprisalls of temptations, from this description of him, and so to frame this distinction to the Apostles generall Rule, that it holds in cases ordinary, but not in extraordinary, when nothing in the whole Context gives the least allowance or continuance to such a limitation.

p. 340It appears then notwithstanding any thing offered here to the contrary, upon due consideration of it, that Believers sinne not with their whole wills and full consents; at any time,§. 26. nor under the power of what temptation soever they may fall for a season, and that because of the Residence of this principle of a contrary tendency unto sinne in their wills which is allwayes acting, either directly in inclining unto good, or in taking off, or making remisse the consent of the will to sinne, not withstanding the prevalency of the principle opposite thereunto, by its committing of sinne.

And hence have we sufficient Light for the weakning of the Argument proposed in the beginning of this Chap.§. 27. For though it is weak in its Foundation (as shall be shewed) concluding to what the Saints may do, from what is forbiddē them to do, that prohibition being the Ordinance of God certainly to preserve thē from it, yet taking it for granted that they may fall into the sin intimated, yet seeing they do it not customarily, not maliciously, not with the full and whole consent of their wills, that there is a principle in them still opposing sin, though at any time weakened by sinne, and the conclusion of that Argument concernes them not. I say then, First to the Major proposition, they who are in a capacity and possibility, that is, (an universall possibility not only in respect of an internall principle but of all outward prohibiting causes as the purpose and Promise of God, of perpetrating the workes of the flesh, not of bringing forth any fruits of the lusting of the flesh, which are in the best, willingly and ordinarily with the full and whole consent of their wills, in which sence alone such workes of the flesh are absolutely exclusive from the Kingdome of Heaven, they may posibly fall out of the favour of God and into destruction. This proposition being thus limited, and the termes of it cleared, for to cause it to passe; I absolutely deny the minor, that true Believers do, or can so sinne; that is, so bring forth the workes of the flesh, as to leave no roome for the continuance of Mercy to them, according to the tenour of the Covenant of Grace.

But now frame the Proposition so, as the Assumption may comprise Believers, & we shall quickly know what to judge of it; Those who are in a capacity or possibility of falling into such sinnes, as deserve rejection from God, or of perpetrating workes of the flesh though they do so, overborne by the power of temptation, nilling the things they do, not abiding in their sinnes may fall totally and finally from God: but Believers may so do. As the matter is thus stated the Assumption may be allowed, to passe upon Believers, but we absolutely deny the Major Proposition in the sence wherein it is urged. I shall only adde that when we deny that Believers can possibly fall away, it is not any absolute impossibility we intend, nor an impossibility with respect to any principle in them, only that in, and from it selfe is not perishable, nor an impossibility in respect of the manner of their acting, but such an one, as principally respecting the outward removing cause of such an actuall defection, will infallibly prevent the event of it. And thus is the cloud raised by this fifth Argument, dispelled and scattered by the light of the very first consideration of the difference in sinning, that is, between Regenerate and unregenerate men: so that it will be an easy thing to remove, & take a way what afterwards is insisted on for the reinforcement and confirmation of the severall Propositions of it.

The Major Proposition he confirmes from Gal. §. 28.5. 21. Eph. 5. 5, 6. 1 Cor. 6. 9, 10. All affirming that neither whoremongers, nor adulterers, nor idolaters nor the like have any inheritance in the Kingdome of God, or can be Saved; That the intendment of the Apostle is concerning them, who live in a course of such sinnes, who sinne with their whole wills, and from an evill roote, with whose p. 341sappe they are wholly leavened, & tainted throughout, not them who through the strength of temptation, and the surprisalls of it, not without the renitency in their wills, unto all sin, any sin, the sinne wherewith they are overtaken, may possibly fall into any such sinne (as did David and Peter) was before declared, and in that sence we grant the Proposition.

For the proofe of the Minor Proposition, which should be, that Believers may perpetrate the Workes of the flesh, in the sence intended, in the places of Scripture before mentioned, he insists on two things. First, the direction of those Scriptures unto Believers. Secondly, the Experience of the wayes of such persons, that is of Believers. The Apostle tells Believers, that they who commit such and such things, with such, and such circumstances in their commitment, cannot be saved; therefore Believers may commit those sinnes in the manner intended: What hath been said before of the use of threatnings, and denunciations of judgements on impenitent sinners, in respect of Believers, will give a sufficient account (if there be need of any) for our deniall of this consequence; and for the Second, that the experience of such mens waies and walking evinceth it; it is a plaine begging of the thing under debate, and an assuming of that, which was proposed to be proved, a thing unjustly charged by him on his Adversaries, as though they should confesse, that Believers might sinne to the extent of the lines drawn out in the places of Scripture mentioned, and yet not loose their faith, when because they cannot loose their Faith, they deny that they can sinne, to that compasse of excesse and riot intimated.