The Riches of Gods Love, Part 2 · Treatise · Type of argument 1 – Type of argument 2
The Firſt ſort of Convincing Reaſons Drawn from Scripture.
DISCOURSE.
SECT. I.
THOSE of the Second ſort, by which for the preſent I ſtand convinced, that abſolute reprobation is no part of Gods truth, are drawn from theſe five following heads,
1. Pregnant Teſtimonies of Scripture directly oppoſite unto it.
2. Some principall attributes of God not compatible with it.
3. The end of the Word and Sacraments, with other excellent gifts of God to men, quite thwarted by it.
4. Holy and pious endeavours much hindered by it, if not wholly ſubverſed.
5. The grounds of comfort, whereby diſtreſſed conſciences are to be relieved, are all overthrown by it.
It it contrary to pregnant places of Scripture, even in terminis, Repugnant to Scripture.as will appeare by theſe inſtances.
1. Ezech. 33. 11. As I live ſaith the Lord, I have no pleaſure in the death of a ſinner, but that the wicked turne from his waies and live. And leaſt men ſhould ſay 'tis true, God wills not the death of a repenting ſinner, the Lord doth in another place of the ſame Prophet, extend the propoſition to them alſo that periſh, Ezech. 18. 32. I have no pleaſure in the death of him that dieth. In this Scripture we may note three things.
1. Gods affection to men ſet forth
1. Negatively, I have no pleaſure in his death that dyeth.
2. Affirmatively, But that the wicked turne.
2. The perſons in whoſe deſtruction he delighteth not, wicked men, ſuch as for the rejecting of grace dye and are damned. If God have no pleaſure in their death, much leſſe in the death of men, either altogether innocent, or tainted only with originall ſinne.
3. The truth of this affection, as I live; cupit ſihi credi (ſaith Tertullian, Lib. de paenit. cap. 4.) God would faine have us to believe him, when he ſaith I will not the death of him that dyeth, and therefore he bindes his ſpeech with an oath: O beatos nos quorum cauſa Deus jurat, O miſerrimos ſi nec juranti Domino credimus. Happy are we for whoſe ſakes the Lord vouchſafeth to ſweare, but moſt unhappy if we believe him not when he ſwears. Now if God delight not in the deſtruction of wicked men, he did never out of his own pleaſure take ſo many millions of men lying in the fall, and ſeale them up by an abſolute decree under invincible damnation: for ſuch a kind of decreeing men to everlaſting death, is quite oppoſite to a delight in mens eternall life.
TWISSE Conſideration.
TO ſay that this or that opinion is untrue, becauſe it doth in terminis contradict places of Scripture, is a very ſuperficiary conſideration: yet it is not the firſt time that I have found it to drop from an Arminians penne: But that it is a very ſuperficiary conſideration, I prove thus; For to deny God the Sonne to be equall to the Father, is in terminis to contradict a pregnant place of Scripture, Phil. 2. Where it is expreſſely ſaid of God the Sonne, that he thought it no robbery to be equall to the Father: yet notwithſtanding it is agreeable to that of our Saviour, where he ſaith, the Father is greater then I; and ſo vice verſâ. In like manner to ſay that God cannot repent, is in terminis to contradict pregnant places of Scripture: again to ſay that God can repent, is in terminis to contradict other as pregnant places of Scripture; yet neither of theſe is unſound; becauſe each phraſe is agreeable to Scripture in ſome place or other. And the reaſon hereof is, becauſe in terminis only to contradict the Scripture, is not to contradict the Scripture; But when we contradict the meaning of Scripture, then and not till then, are we juſtly ſaid to contradict the Scripture; And the reaſon hereof is, becauſe the word of God conſiſts not in the outward barke or bone of the letter, but in the inward pith and marrow of the meaning. And as for contradiction unto Scripture in terminis, it may eaſily be proved, that to deny Gods delight in the deſtruction of obſtinate ſinners, is to contradict a very Nec putemus in verbis Scripturarum Evangelium eſſe, ſed in ſenſu, non in ſuperficie, ſed in medulla, non in ſermonum foliis, ſed in radice rationis. Hieron. in Epiſt. ad Galat. c. 1.pregnant place of Holy Scripture, as namely Prov. 1. 24, 25, 26. Becauſe I have called and ye refuſed, I have ſtretched out my hand and no man regarded; but ye have ſet at naught all my counſell, and would none of my reproofe: I will alſo laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your feare cometh; when your feare cometh as deſolation, and your deſtruction as a Whirlewind. And yet never a whit the more, is any contradiction found in Scripture for this: becauſe though they contradict each the other in terminis, yet there is no contradiction if we conſider the true meaning: As for example, it is both true that the Father is greater then the Sonne, as touching the Sonnes Manhood; And the Sonne equall to the Father as touching his Godhead. So of repentance, it cannot be attributed to God as it ſignifies change of mind or counſell; but it may be attributed unto God, as it ſignifies change of ſentence; according to that of Gregory, Deus mutat ſententiam, conſilium nunquam. So as touching Gods pleaſure or delight in the death of a ſinner, as it is the deſtruction of the creature he delighteth not in it; but as it is a juſt puniſhment of the impenitent creature, he delights therein: Thus Piſcator reconciles it, on Ezech. 18. v. 23, & 32. Surely God delights in the execution of juſtice, as well as in the execution of mercy, as Jer. 9. 24. I am the Lord which exerciſeth loving kindneſſe, judgement, and righteouſneſſe in the earth, for in theſe things I delight ſaith the Lord.
2. Here firſt, the Author declines from the former phraſe, of having no pleaſure in the death of a ſinner, to not willing the death of a ſinner; which phraſes have no ſmall difference, as Piſcator obſerves upon that in Ezech. 33. 11. for ſaith he, poteſt homo velle id quo non delectatur, ut aegrotus poteſt velle potum amarum, quo non delectatur, poteſt enim eum velle non perſe, ſed propter aliud, nempe ad recuper andam valetudinem. And to deny that God willeth the death of as many as dye, is in terminis to contradict a pregnant place of Scripture, as where it is ſaid, that God worketh all things according to the counſell of his will, Epheſ. 1. 11. And therefore ſeeing the inflicting of death is Gods work he muſt will it: But this Author is more happy for invention then his fellowes: For whereas others of his opinion, work upon the place as it is rendred in the vulgar Latine, Nolo mortem peccatoris: this Author hath found out an argument from the very phraſe of our laſt Engliſh tranſlation, to advantage his cauſe, as when from Gods having no pleaſure in the death of a ſinner, he quaintly inferres, therefore God doth not of meer pleaſure, will or decree their death; But how ſuperficiary this is alſo, and how fouly it falls in the iſſue, upon the Author himſelfe (as uſually it falleth out with men, that affect new and quaint inventions) I hope to diſcover in due place.
Farther obſerve; that place, Ezech. 33. 11. I have no pleaſure in the death of the wicked, according to our laſt Engliſh tranſlation, and that, Ezech. 18. 23. Have I any pleaſure at all that the wicked ſhould dye, doe differently render one and the ſame phraſe in the Hebrew, in the death of the wicked, Ezech. 33. 11. which is word for word according to the Hebrew; that the wicked ſhould dye Ezech. 18. 23. which being not according to the preciſe termes of the originall, it followeth that hereby, our Tranſlators did expound the ſenſe of the Hebrew, which is word for word, in the death of the wicked, and ſo accordingly, that phraſe, Ezek. 18. 32. in the death of him that dieth, importeth as much as this, that he who dyeth ſhould dye.
And as for Tertullian, that which he alleadgeth out of him, neither makes for him nor againſt us: we all believe what the Prophet delivereth; but we enquire about the ſenſe of it; But in the ſame place Tertullian interprets the place not abſolutely but comparatively, thus, Vivo inquit Dominus, & paenitentiam malo quam mortem, and indeed thus it is accommodated more then once in the Book of Common prayer, as firſt in the generall abſolution; then, in one of the Collects upon Good-Friday: There is a double pleaſure, that God may be ſaid to take in the one, but a ſingle pleaſure only in the other. For in the death of an impenitent ſinner, God delights only in the execution of juſtice: but in the converſion of ſuch a one that he may live, God delights both in the execution of mercy, which is equivalent to his delight taken in the execution of judgement, and over and above he delights in their repentance; For like as of ſuch as fall from God, it is ſaid, His ſoule hath no pleaſure in them: ſo of ſuch as turne unto him, it is as true, that his ſoule hath pleaſure in them.
3. But give we him leave to enjoy the interpretation he affecteth, yet conſider I pray, whether he doth not enjoy it tanquam Diis iratis, and to his bane: for marke I pray his argument, and conſider whether I doe not from the ſame argument, moſt ſtrongly conclude againſt him.
1. His argument runnes thus, If God delighteth not in the deſtruction of wicked men, he did never out of his own pleaſure, take ſo many millions of men lying in the fall, and ſeale them up by an abſolute decree under invincible damnation. Now from the rule of contraries, I herehence diſpute thus; If this be a good conſequence which he makes, then on the contrary it followes, that ſeeing God doth take pleaſure and delight in mans eternall life (as this Author expreſſely acknowledgeth) therefore he did out of his own pleaſure, take ſo many million of men lying in the fall, and ſeale them up by an abſolute decree under invincible ſalvation. Now this concluſion is as directly oppoſite unto him in the poynt of election, as his concluſion is oppoſire to ours in the poynt of reprobation. And my argument muſt be of the ſame force and validity with his; becauſe Contrariorum contraria eſt ratio. Yet I will not content my ſelfe with this anſwere.
2. Therefore conſider I pray in the next place, the true meaning of this phraſe I have no pleaſure: in theſe places of the Prophet, the Author himſelfe though he doth not plainly profeſſe what is the meaning of it, as it became him to doe, and not to depend upon colour of words ſuitable; yet by his drift he manifeſts the meaning of it to be this, that God doth not bring death upon a ſinner, of meere pleaſure, but being provoked thereunto, (and that according to the purport of the firſt place Ezech. 18.) by the ſinner himſelfe; and alſo, (according to the purport of the ſecond place) only in caſe of impenitency. And I concurre with him in this: And ſo I conceive it to be delivered in the ſame ſenſe with that Lament. 3. 32, 33. For though he cauſe griefe (to wit by reaſon of mens ſinnes v. 39.) yet will he have compaſsion according to the multitude of his mercies, (to wit, in caſe he repents Ier. 18. 7. Iudg. 10. 16.) For he doth not afflict willingly, nor grieve the children of men. Mark I pray, not willingly; to wit, in as much as he is provoked thereunto by ſinne, and by refuſall to repent. And this is in the former Scripture phraſes, not to take pleaſure in the afflicting and grieving of men. For if any work be ſuch, as wherein pleaſure is taken; we need not enquire after a cauſe why it is done, but though no pleaſure be taken in it, yet for ſome benefit redounding thereby, a man may doe it, yea though it be grievous and bitter unto him: As a ſick man is willing to take a bitter potion for the recovery of his health. Now come we to the argument: God takes no pleaſure in the death of any; therefore he doth not of pleaſure inflict death. We willingly grant it, in as much as he never inflicts eternall death on any, that doth not dye in ſinne unrepented of: And as he doth not inflict death on any of meere pleaſure, that is, without juſt cauſe on the part of him that dyeth, deſerving it: So we willingly confeſſe, that God did never decree to inflict death on any without juſt cauſe on the Malefactors part deſerving death. And this is the uttermoſt whereunto this Authors argument can be extended. And all our Divines unanimouſly confeſſe, that God neither decreed to damne any man of his meer pleaſure, but for his ſinne wherein he died without repentance.
3. Obſerve the cunning of this Diſputer, to deceive himſelfe firſt, and then to abuſe his readers: For whereas he ſhould have proceeded in his argument by degrees, thus; God hath no pleaſure in the death of a ſinner, therefore he doth not of his own pleaſure inflict death; and thence proceed (if he had thought good) to conclude the like of Gods decree, thus; if God doth not of his ownpleaſure inflict, then neither doth he of his own pleaſure decree to inflict death and damnation: This author leaping over the inflicting of death, as a block in his way (for the laſt conſequence would have betrayed its own nakedneſſe) flyeth at firſt to the application of it, to Gods decree: Now I willingly grant, that Gods having no pleaſure in the death of a ſinner, doth ſignify, that God inflicts death on no man without a cauſe, for that were of meer pleaſure to inflict: But dares he herehence inferre, therefore God doth not of meer pleaſure decree to inflict death and damnation on man for ſinne, for to this alone comes all the force of this argument. Now to ſhew the vanity of this conſequence, conſider I pray.
1. It is as if he ſhould argue thus in plain termes; ſinne is alwaies the meritorious cauſe of damnation; therefore ſinne is the meritorious cauſe of Gods eternall decree of damnation: Now this Enthymeme hath no force any farther, then it may be reduced into a Categoricall Syllogiſme; and this Enthymeme is reducible into no other Syllogiſme then this; Damnation is the decree of Damnation, ſinne is the cauſe of Damnation, therefore ſinne is the cauſe of the decree of damnation. But in this Syllogiſme the propoſition containes a notorious untruth: Or thus, Sinne is the cauſe of damnation; therefore the foreſight of ſinne is the cauſe of the decree of damnation: But this Enthymeme is not reducible unto any categoricall Syllogiſme at all, for as much as it conſiſts of foure termes; all which muſt be clapt into the Syllogiſme whereunto it is reduced, and conſequently make that Syllogiſme conſiſt of foure termes, which utterly overthrowes the illative forme thereof.
2. We may as well diſpute thus; Good works as well as faith and repentance are the diſpoſing cauſe unto ſalvation, therefore good works as well as faith and repentance (or the foreſight of them) are the diſpoſing cauſe to Gods election, or to the decree of ſalvation.
But ſhall I tell you, the chiefe flouriſh whereupon this Author (and uſually the Arminians) doth inſiſt in this his looſe argumentation, I conceive it to be this; they hope their credulous readers, unexpert in diſtinguiſhing between Gods eternall decree, and the temporall execution thereof, will be apt hereupon to conceit, that we maintain, that God doth not only of meer pleaſure decree whatſoever he decreeth, but alſo that he doth decree of meer pleaſure to damne men: which yet is utterly contrary (if I be not deceived) to the tenet of all our Divines: all concurring in this, that God in the execution of the decree of damnation, proceeds according to a Law, and not in the execution of reprobation only, but alſo in the execution of election. And the law is this, Whoſoever believes ſhall be ſaved, whoſoever believes not ſhall be damned, And like as he inflicteth not damnation, but by way of puniſhment, ſo he conferres not ſalvation but by way of reward. But in the execution of his decrees of election unto grace, and reprobation from grace; we willingly profeſſe that God proceeds according to no law given unto men, to prepare themſelves hereunto, but meerly according to his good pleaſure, having mercy on whom he will, and hardning whom he will: And this indeed is the criticall poynt of this controverſy: But neither this Author nor his complices (ſome of them of my knowledge) have any heart to deale on this. I come to his Second pregnant place as he calleth it.
DISCOURSE. SECT. II.
GOD hath ſhut up all in unbeliefe, that he might have mercy on all. Rom. 11. 32. in theſe words of the Apoſtle are two [alls] of equall extent; the one ſtanding juſt againſt the other; an [all] of unbelievers, and an [all] of objects of mercy; look how many unbelievers there be, on ſo many hath God a will of ſhewing mercy. And therefore if all men of all ſorts and conditions, and every man in every ſort be an unbeliever, then is every man of every condition under mercy, And if every man be under mercy, then there is no antecedent preciſe will in God of ſhutting up ſome (and thoſe the moſt) from all poſſibility of obtaining mercy; for theſe two are foreign they cannot ſtand together.
TWISSE Conſideration.
I Willingly grant the word [all] in each place is of equall extent, but how? in the Apoſtles meaning in this place; that is, look in what ſenſe the Apoſtle takes the word [all] when he ſaith God hath concluded all under unbeliefe: in the ſame ſenſe he takes the word [all] when he ſayeth, that he might have mercy upon all. And accordingly in caſe when he ſaith the one he meaneth by the word [all] no more but Jewes & Gentiles: it followes that when he ſaith God hath mercy on all, by the word [all] he underſtands no more then both Jewes and Gentile, and that is, certain nations of men only, not all men of all ſorts and conditions; And therefore although it were granted him, that all men of all ſorts are unbelievers, yet unleſſe he can prove, that in this ſenſe the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of [all] in ſaying God hath concluded all under infidelity, let any one that is indifferent, judge whether this argument be of any force. Thus our Divines underſtand it, to wit, of Jewes and Gentiles: Thus Aquinas and Sasbutius Popiſh Divines interpret it. Aquinas his words are theſe, omnia, id eſt, omne hominum genus, tam Judaeos quam Gentes in incredulitate concluſit, ut omnium miſereatur, id eſt, ut in omni hominum genere miſericordia locum habeat; And again; non eſt extendendum ad omnes homines ſigillatim, ſed ad omnia genera hominum: Fit enim hic diſtributio pro generibus ſingulorum, & non pro ſingulis generum. So Cajetan. Concluſit permiſſive omnes tam Judaeos quam Gentes in peccatum infidelitatis. The Text it ſelfe doth cleerely juſtify this, as appears by the two verſes immediatly preceding, wherewith this coheres. v. 30. For even as the Gentiles in times paſt have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy, through (the Jewes) unbeliefe. 31. Even ſo now have they (the Jewes) not believed, by the mercy ſhewed to you Gentiles, that they alſo, that is, the Jewes, may obtain mercy. This conſtruction was embraced of old by Austin, as appears by Beda upon the Romans, alleadging Auguſt. de Civit. Dei lib. 21. Concluſit Deus omnes in infidelitate ut omnium miſereatur. Quos omnes? niſi de quibus loquebatur, tanquam dicens & vos & illos. Deus ergo & Gentiles & Judaeos, quos praeſcivit & praedeſtinavit conformes fieri imagini filii ſui, omnes in infidelitate concluſit, & de amaritudine infidelitatis ſuae paenitendo confuſi, & ad dulcedinem miſericordiae Dei credendo converſi clamaret &c. And anon after, Omnium ita que miſeretur vaſorum miſericordiae: Quid eſt omnium? & eorum ſcilicet quos ex Gentibus, & eorum quos ex Judae is praedeſtinavit.
2. Obſerve how he hides himſelfe under an ambiguous phraſe, leaſt he ſhould come with his foule opinion to the light: As when he ſaith every man of every condition is under mercy. The Apoſtles phraſe on Gods part is miſereri, to ſhew mercy; on mans part as partaking hereof is to obtain mercy. v. 30. 31. and to obtain mercy is to believe. v. 30. as appears by the oppoſition: for to obtain mercy and not to believe, are there made oppoſite, therefore to obtain mercy and to believe are the ſame: For to believe and not to believe are formally oppoſite. Now dares this Author avouch, that every man of every condition doth believe? Again the Apoſtles word ut miſereatur, that he may ſhew mercy, is not ſpoken of the time preſent; for as much as for the time preſent, the Lord had mercy only on the Nations of the Gentiles: But the time ſhould come, that God would alſo have mercy on the Jewes, and conſequently on all. But when ſhould this come to paſſe? Surely not 'till 1600 years after, to wit, when the time cometh which is appoynted for the effectuall and generall calling of the Nation of the Jewes.
So that the foundation being moſt rotten, no marvail if the edifice he builds hereupon muſt needs totter. For the Jewes were thus to be ſhut up under infidelity, for many hundred years, to wit, untill the time came which the Apoſtle propheſyeth of. And ſo were the Gentiles alſo before them, 'till the time came of their calling. And thus Sasbutius interpreteth the Apoſtle in this very place. Senſus est (ſaith he) ſic viſum eſt Deo diſpenſare utriuſ que populi ſalutem, Iudaeorum videlicet & Gentium; ut permitteret utrum que populum ſuo vitio concludi, ſive conſtringi, ſub incredulitate & damnatione. Concludi, inquam, ne ullâ ratione poſcit ex incredulitate ſuâ vinculo ſe liberare, ut ipſius miſericordia gratuita locum habere agnoſcatur in utro que populo tam Iudaeorum quam Gentium. Thus we ſee that both his [alls] are not worth a Bodkin; and to give him two [alls] more to encreaſe his ſtore, we may juſtly ſay that all this is nothing at all to the purpoſe.
DISCOURSE. SECT. III.
IOhn 3. 16. God ſo loved the World that he gave his only begotten Sonne, that whoſoever &c. God loved the World, that is, the whole lump of Man-kind, therefore God did not abſolutely hate the greateſt part of Man-kind. God loved it fallen into a guilt of ſinne and miſery, for he ſo loved them, as to ſend his Sonne to redeeme them; and a Saviour preſuppoſeth ſinne. He did not therefore hate the moſt of them conſidered in the fall, for love and hatred are contrary acts, and cannot be exerciſed about the ſame Object. Many expoſitors (I know) doe take World here in a reſtrained ſenſe, and underſtand by it the company of the Elect, or the World of believers only, but they have little reaſon for it (in my opinion;) for, 1. I think there can be no place of Scripture alleadged wherein this word World eſpecially with the condition of whole, as in 1 Epiſt. of Iohn. 2. 2. (which is a place equivalent to this for the matter of it, and a comment upon it) I ſay (I think) no place can be produced where World doth ſignify only the Elect, or only believers; but it ſignifies either all men, or at leaſt, the moſt men, living in ſome certain place, and at ſome certain time, but without diſtinction of good and bad: or if it be uſed any where more reſtrainedly, it is applyed only to the wicked and Reprobate men, who are wedded in their affections to the World, and the tranſitory delights thereof, and therefore doe moſt properly deſerve this name.
2. Suppoſe it be granted that World in ſome Scriptures is reſtrained to the Elect, yet it cannot bear this ſignification here; becauſe,
1. The words then would have a bad and ſenſeleſſe conſtruction; for thus would they runne, God ſo loved the Elect that whoſoever believed in him ſhould not periſh &c. And if they runne thus, then this would follow, there are two ſorts of the Elect, ſome that doe believe, and ſhall be ſaved; others that doe not believe, and ſhall be damned, which is a diviſion or diſtinction unknown in Divinity.
2. Believers and Vnbelievers, damned and ſaved comprehend all Man kind, for there is no man but is one of theſe. Now World in this place includeth believers and unbelievers, the ſaved and the damned, (as appears moſt plainly to him that conſiders the words;) therefore it ſignifieth here all Man kind without exception of any. Againſt this Scripture therefore fights this abſolute reprobation and hatred of men.
TWISSE Conſideration.
BE it the whole lump of man-kind (if that Lettice like his lipps.) I ſhould think by World, is meant homines in mundo degentes, men at any time living in the World without any reſtraint: But herehence it followeth not, that God doth not abſolutely hate the greateſt part of man-kind; which this Author ſhould have proved, but he doth not; therefore I will not only deny it, but diſprove it. Firſt therefore conſider, this love is only ſecundum Quid, in reference to mens perſons, namely, ſo farre forth as in caſe they believe, they ſhall obtain everlaſting life through the Sonne of God: But if there were no farther love of God towards man, they might be damned, yea every Mothers ſonne for all this. Secondly, if faith it ſelfe be a gift of God, and God gives it not to all, but to ſome only, and thoſe but a few; (for even of them that are called few are choſen:) and withall if God hath abſolutely decreed to beſtow this grace only on a few, and deny it to the greateſt part of the World, will it not manifeſtly follow herehence, that if abſolutely to decree the denyall of faith be to hate, then ſurely God abſolutely hates the greateſt part of men, notwithſtanding this love here mentioned, albeit we extend it to all and every one. Therefore it became this Author to prove, that God is indifferent to give Faith to one as well as to another: and that either abſolutely, whence it would follow, that all and every one, ſhould both believe and be ſaved; or conditionally, and therewithall repreſent unto us, what that condition is, whereupon God beſtowes faith on one, and for the want thereof, he refuſeth to beſtow faith on another. This is the very criticall poynt about the controverſies of Gods decrees. Here therefore he ſhould have ſhewed his ſtrength: For as for Gods purpoſe to damne, we willingly profeſſe, that as God damnes no man but for ſinne, ſo he purpoſeth to damne no man but for ſinne. But as for his purpoſe to give or deny the grace of regeneration, the grace of faith and repentance, we as readily profeſſe, that not the purpoſe only, but the very giving of faith and repentance, for the curing of infidelity and hardneſſe of heart in ſome, and the denying of it unto others, ſo to leave their naturall infidelity and hardneſſe of heart uncured, proceeds meerely according to the good pleaſure of his will, according to that of the Apoſtle, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth; And by a cloud of teſtimonies out of Auſtin we can prove, that in this very ſenſe he underſtood the Apoſtle in that place. And indeed no other interpretation of that place, can with any modeſty be deviſed, or obtruded upon us. As for the redeeming of all and every one by Chriſt, diſtinguiſheth that which the haters of Gods truth doe delight to confound. There is a redemption from the guilt of ſinne, and a redemption from the power of ſinne: For we are redeemed from our vaine converſation. Chriſt came into the World to diſſolve the works of the Devill: No greater works of Satan then blindneſſe of heart, 2 Cor. 4. 3. and hardneſſe of heart, Epheſ. 2. 2. and 2 Tim. 2. laſt. The pardon of ſinne, and ſalvation, God beſtowes only on believers, and upon condition of faith: Now like as God is ready to beſtow theſe benefits on all and every one, and that for Chriſts ſake, in caſe they believe: ſo Chriſt hath merited pardon of ſinne and ſalvation for all and every one, in caſe they believe. Such is the ſufficiency of Chriſts merit, that if every one of Adams race ſhould believe, every one ſhould be ſaved: and this preſent Text proceeds upon this, namely, upon the ſufficiency of Chriſts merits. But enquire farther whether Chriſt did not merit for us the grace of faith, and if he did, whether abſolutely of conditionally; if abſolutely then all muſt believe de facto, and be ſaved; if conditionally, then faith is a grace, which God beſtowes on man conditionally. Now let this Author ſhew us what that condition is, upon performance whereof by man, God will give him faith, and let him try whether he can carry himſelfe ſo warily herein, as not to plunge himſelfe into plain Pelagianiſme. This poynt is a break-neck, or Crevecoeur unto all Arminians, they generally avoyd the delivering of their minds clearly hereupon, as a man would avoyd a precipice. It is true ſome Divines doe interpret the word [World] here, of the Elect, as Piſcator; Rolloc doth not, making no mention of the Elect hereupon. And Piſcators meaning is no more then this, viz. that this love of God in reſpect of every gracious effect (I mean in the way of ſanctifying grace) determins only upon the Elect; for in all likelihood, he followed Calvin in this, Univerſalem notam appoſuit (ſaith Calvin) tum ut promiſcuè omnes ad vitae participationem invitet, tum ut praecidat excuſationem incredulis. To the ſame purpoſe (ſaith he) pertaines nomen mundi, quo prius uſus eſt. And again, ſe toti mundo propitium oſtendit, quum ſine exceptione omnes ad fidem vocat: But here he ſubjoynes a caution, thus; Caeterum meminerimus ita communiter promitti omnibus vitam ſi in Chriſto crediderint, ut tamen minime communis omnium ſit fides. Patet enim omnibus Chriſtus & expoſitus eſt, ſolis tamen Electis oculos Deus aperit & fide ipſum quaerant. So that this gracious promiſe is generall to all and every one, whoſoever believes ſhall be ſaved; But yet notwithſtanding if it ſhall appeare, that God gives the grace of faith, to none but to a certain number, (which are his Elect) it followes, that the effect of this love of God, to wit, Salvation ſhall in the iſſue redound to none but Gods Elect.
1. As for the deſigning a place where the World is taken for the Elect; we need no ſuch place, as I have ſhewed; yet Piſcator conceives that ſo it is taken, Iohn 3. 17. That the World might be ſaved by him. But what think you of Rom. 11. 15. Where the caſting away of the Jewes is ſaid to be the reconciliation of the World. And that 2 Cor. 5. 19. God was in Chriſt reconciling the World unto himſelfe. I ſay the reconciled World is only Gods Elect, for the reconciled are all ſaved, as I prove by the Apoſtles argument Rom. 5. If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne, how much more being reconciled ſhall we be ſaved by his life. Ioh. 1. 29. The Lamb of God that taketh away the ſinnes of the World. Are their ſinnes taken away that are damned for them? And Ioh. 6. 33. He gives life to the World; Is life given to any but to the Elect?
2. The ſecond reaſons, why in this place it cannot be ſo taken, are in effect but one, and that a weake one:
1. Becauſe, that they that underſtand it of the Elect, underſtand it ſo in no other ſenſe, but as I have expounded it.
2. If I ſhould ſay of the twelve Apoſtles (Judas excluded, and Matthias ſubſtituted in his roome) that God ſo loved them, that he gave his only begotten Sonne, that whoſoever of them believed in him, ſhould not periſh but have everlaſting life; who can deny, but that this was a truth accommodated unto them? but will it here hence follow, that among thoſe Apoſtles, ſome were believers ſome unbelievers? Suppoſe all the World were Elect, and it pleaſed God to give them all Faith, ſhould this Doctrine be the leſſe true, whoſoever believes ſhall be ſaved? yet in this caſe it would not follow, that amongſt the World of men ſome were believers, and ſome unbelievers.
But whereas he faines, that ſome of our Divines ſhould interpret the word [World] here of Believers, that is ſuch a fiction as is incredible. I come to the fourth.
DISCOURSE. SECT. IV.
1. TImoth. 2. 4. Who would have all to be ſaved and come to the knowledge of his truth. In theſe words the Apoſtle delivers two things. 1. That it is Gods will, that all men ſhould obtain an happy end, viz. Salvation. 2. That it is his will alſo, that they ſhould uſe and enjoy the means, which is the knowledge of his truth, that ſo they might obtain the end, the ſalvation of their ſoules; there is no let in God, but that all men may believe and be ſaved, and therefore there is no abſolute will, that many thouſands of men ſhall never believe nor be ſaved.
Two anſwers are uſually returned, which give me little ſatisfaction: The firſt is, that by All we are to underſtand all ſorts, and not every particular man in every ſort and condition. It is true that [all] is ſometimes ſo uſed in Scripture, but (I believe) not here: for the very Text ſhewes that we are to underſtand by it, the Individualls and not the kindes: v. 1. There is a duty enjoyned, I will that prayers and ſupplications be made for all men, and in this verſe the motive is annexed, God will have all to be ſaved; as if he ſhould have ſaid, our charity muſt reach to all, whom God extends his love to: God will have all to be ſaved, therefore we muſt pray for all: Now in the duty All ſignifies every man, for no man though wicked and prophane, is to be excluded from our prayers; pray for them (ſaith our Saviour) that perſecute you; And pray (ſaith the Apoſtle here) for Kings, and all that are in Authority, men in thoſe daies (though the greateſt) yet the worſt, yea very Wolves, and Lyons, and Bears of the Church; pray for them, and if for them, then for any other, thus in the duty it ſignifies every man; and if it doe ſo in the duty, it muſt have the ſame extent in the motive too; or elſe the motive will not reach home, nor have ſtrength enough to enforce the duty. The ſecond anſwer is, that God will have all to be ſaved with his revealed will, have Millions to be damned with his ſecret will. If this anſwer ſtand, then (in my underſtanding) theſe inconveniences will follow.
1. That Gods words (which are his revealed will) are not interpretations of his mind and meaning, and by conſequence are not true; for Oratio quae non eſt mentis ſignificatio, ſimulatio eſt.
2. That there are two contrary willes in God; a ſecret will, that many Sonnes of Adam ſhall irrevocably be damned; and a revealed will, that all the Sonnes of Adam may be ſaved.
3. That one of Gods wills muſt needs be bad, either the ſecret will, or the revealed; for of contraries if the one be good, the other is bad; and ſo of Gods contrary wills, if the one be good, the other muſt needs be bad, for malum is contrarium bono.
TWISSE Conſideration.
THe Concluſion here is very looſe; the Arguments being thus; It is Gods will that all ſhould be ſaved; therefore there is no abſolute will, that many thouſands of men ſhall never believe nor be ſaved: and the vanity of this conſequence, I will ſhew more waies then one.
1. The Apoſtle doth not ſay, It is the abſolute will of God that all men ſhall be ſaved: nay Voſſius interprets this place, and that according to the meaning of the Ancients, of voluntas conditionata, a conditionall will in God, not abſolute; and he gives inſtance Hiſt. Pelag. lib. 6. 7. p. 638.of it thus; It is the will of God that all ſhall be ſaved, in caſe they believe in Chriſt. Now albeit it be the conditionall will of God that all, and every one ſhall be ſaved in caſe they believe, yet this hinders not, but that it may be the abſolute will of God, that many thouſands of men ſhall never be ſaved; as in caſe his will be to deny the grace of faith and repentance to many thouſands, as it is cleare and undeniable that he doth.
Nay the Remonſtrants themſelves, and particularly an Arminian that I had to doe withall lately, ſpared not to profeſſe, that Election is abſolute; if ſo, then reprobation alſo is abſolute; and I doubt not but that they will all confeſſe, that howbeit Gods will be, that all ſhould be ſaved, yet thouſands are reprobated.
2. Suppoſe the Apoſtle had ſaid, it is the abſolute will of God, that all men ſhall be ſaved, yet I ſay it followes not herehence, but that by the abſolute will of God many might faile of falvation: for it was the abſolute will of God, that every foure footed beaſt ſhould be repreſented to Peter, let downe unto him in a linnen veſſell; yet nevertheleſſe it might be that many thouſands were not repreſented to him, and that by the will of God.
Thus having diſcovered the vanity of this concluſion; I will now proceed to demonſtrate that this place cannot be underſtood, of Gods will in proper ſpeech, viz. willing all and every one to be ſaved.
1. Like as it is impoſſible, that a man at the ſame time ſhould be ſaved and damned; ſo it is impoſſible, that God ſhould at the ſame time and duration, both will to ſave and will to damne the ſame man: But God from everlaſting did will to damne many thouſands; therefore it was impoſſible, that from everlaſting he ſhould will to ſave them.
2. If it be Gods will that all and every one ſhall be ſaved; then all and every one ſhall be ſaved, For who hath reſiſted his will. Rom. 9. 19. And for confirmation hereof, we find in our ſelves, that if we will doe ought, we doe it if we can; and if we doe not ought, the reaſon is, either becauſe we have no will to doe it, or becauſe we have no power to doe it. In like ſort, that God doth not ſave many thouſands, the reaſon muſt be, either becauſe he will not, or becauſe he cannot; not becauſe he will not; for theſe profeſſe that it is his will to ſave all and every one; Therefore the reaſon why he doth not ſave all, muſt needs be, becauſe he cannot ſave them: this was Austins argument 1200 years agoe. Enchirid. cap. 96. and 97. handling this very place of the Apoſtle.
3. If God did from everlaſting will the ſalvation of all and every one, then either at this day he doth continue to will the ſalvation of all and every one, and ſhall continue for ever to will it, or no; if he doth continue to will it and ever ſhall, then ſay that God doth will the ſalvation of the damned both Men and Divells; albeit it is well known he damnes them. If he doth not continue to will it, then is God of a changeable nature; directly contrary to the word of God, as well as to manifeſt reaſon: With him (ſaith Iames) is no variableneſſe nor ſhadow of change. I the Lord am not changed, Mal. 3. 6. As for that which he thruſts in, to help make weight, ſaying, that there is no let in God, but that all men may believe and be ſaved, this is a moſt improper ſpeech; for no man is ſaid (in proper ſpeech) to be let from doing ought, but upon preſuppoſition that he would doe it; now we utterly deny that God hindreth any man from believing and repenting, whoſe will is diſpoſed to believe and repent. But ſeeing all men have infidelity and hardneſſe of heart naturall unto them, as a fruit of that corruption wherein all are borne; we deny that God c…es it in all, but only in whom he will, according to that of Saint Paul, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth. And our Saviour upon the ſame ground, is bold to tell the Jewes, ſaying, Ye therefore heare not my words (that is, Rom. 9. 18. Joh. 4. 47.believe them not) becauſe ye are not of God.
2. The firſt expoſition here mentioned was given by Auſtin, many hundred years agoe. Enchirid. cap. 103. and he proves this his interpretation of the word [all] by the congruity of it to Scripture phraſe in other places, as where it is ſaid of the Phariſes, that they tythe every herbe; his words are theſe, I…to locuti…nis modo & Dominus uſus eſt in Evangelio, ubi ait Phariſeis, Decimatis mentham, & rutam, & omne olus: ne que enim Phariſei quaecun que aliena, & omnium per omnes terras alienigenarum omnium olera decimabant. Sicut ergo hic omne olus, omne olerum genus; it a & illic omnes homines, omne hominum genus, intelligere poſſumus: yet ſee the ingenuity of this great light of the Church of God: for forthwith he gives leave to deviſe any other convenient interpretation; provided that we doe not violate Gods omnipotency, by ſaying, that any thing that God would have brought to paſſe, is not brought to paſſe; his words are theſe, Et quocun que alio modo intelligi poteſt, dum tamen credere no cogamur aliquid omnipotentem Deum noluiſſe fieri, factum que non eſſe; qui ſine ullis ambagibus ſi in caelo & terra (ſicut & veritas cantat) omnia quaecun que voluit fecit: profecto facere noluit, quaecun que non fecit. This interpretation is generally received by our Divines, becauſe of the congruity thereof to the Text it ſelfe; for as much as the Apoſtle having firſt admoniſhed them in the generall to pray for all, forthwith he deſcends to ſpecialls, as Voſſius acknowledgeth, Generi ſpeciem ſubjicit; now look in what ſort the Species is to be underſtood, after the ſame manner is the Generall to be underſtood. Now the Specialls mentioned, are certain ſorts or conditions of men, as Kings, and ſuch as are in authority; therefore the generall [all] muſt in like manner be underſtood of all ſorts, and all conditions of men: upon this conſideration alſo it was that Auſtin did inſiſt, in the place before alleadged: Praeceperat (ſaith he) Apoſtolus ut or aretur pro ſingulis hominibus, & ſpecialiter addiderat pro Regibus, & iis qui in ſublimitate ſunt, qui putari poterant faſtu & ſuperbia ſeculari a fidei Chriſtianae humilitate abhorrere. Proinde dicens, hoc enim bonum eſt coram ſalvatore noſtro Deo, id eſt, ut etiam pro talibus oretur; ſtatim ut deſperationem tolleret, addit, qui omnes homines vult ſalves fieri, & in agnitionem veritatis venire. Hoc quippe Deus bonum judicavit, ut orationibus humilium dignaretur, praeſtare ſalutem ſublimium. Now I come to conſider what this Author hath to ſay againſt this expoſition, for he gives us very gravely to underſtand, that it gives him little ſatisfaction: we are therefore to expect ſome better ſatisfaction from him.
It is true that [all] is ſo uſed in Scripture, not only ſome times, but very frequently; let him come to inſtance in his ſenſe, we are ready to inſtance with him for ours. But the Text (ſaith he) ſhewes we are to underſtand the individualls and not the kindes. Where firſt (I doubt) his ignorance, in underſtanding the diſtinction aright, is his beſt ground of oppoſition. When Auſtin urgeth for his interpretation, that of the Phariſes tything omne olus, every hearb, who doubts but they tythe Individuall hearbs. In like ſort when Peter ſaw in a veſſell let down unto him foreign every foure footed beaſt; no queſtion but Individuall beaſts were let down unto him, not every one of every kind, but of every kind or of moſt kinds, or of many kinds ſome, ſo that the meaning of the diſtinction is not to exclude all individualls (as this Author ſeems to carry the matter,) but only, to exclude a neceſſity of underſtanding all individualls of all ſorts. It is enough if God will ſave ſome of all ſorts, that is, of all conditions ſome individualls. Then, ſeeing he undertakes out of the very Text, to give us better ſatisfaction, then either Auſtin or our Divines have hitherto received, it muſt needs be a ſhame for him to leave the preſent Text, and fetch grounds elſewhere, for the clearing of Pauls meaning here. Now let us obſerve, how congruouſly or incongruouſly to his own undertakings, he carryeth himſelfe in this buſineſſe: of the duty enjoyned, and of the motive annexed, there is no queſtion: but whereas he ſhapes the coherence thus, and makes Paul in effect to ſpeak after this manner; our charity muſt reach to all to whom God extends his love to; God will have all to be ſaved, and therefore we muſt pray for all. Though all this were granted him, it makes nothing for him: but over and above here are cauſeleſſe errours more then enough:
For, firſt, our charity muſt extend farther then Gods love; was not Jacob bound to carry himſelfe charitably towards his brother Eſau? though Gods hatred of Eſau, we know was as ancient as his love to Iacob.
2. We are not bound to extend our charity ſo far as God extends his love; for many thouſands there be in the World, (not to ſpeak of the Elect departed this life) towards whom it may be God extends his love, which yet are unknown to us; & are we bound to pray for we know not whom. Again, Gods love, with this Author, is extended as farre as his will to ſave, and that is extended to all and every one: and unleſſe God be now changed, it muſt extend to them now after they are damned, and muſt our charity be extended towards them alſo? But he proceeds, let us proceed with him. Now (ſaith he) [all] in the duty ſignifies every man; but that we deny; he gives his reaſon, for no man though wicked and prophane, is to be excluded from our Prayers.
Againſt this I have two exceptions, (and yet if the whole be granted him, it maketh nothing for him:) my firſt exception is this; he promiſed to give us ſatisfaction out of the Text it ſelfe; but who ſeeth not but that this rule of his, is brought in quite beſides the Text: I from the Text have proved, and from the coherence between the generall and the ſpeciall, that the ſpeciall being certain particular conditions of men, the generall [all] muſt conformably be underſtood of all conditions.
My ſecond exception is this; he obtrudes upon us, that no man, though wicked and prophane, is to be excluded from our Prayers. I confeſſe I doe not find my ſelfe apt to exclude any from my prayers; but I cannot endure, that a bold fellow ſhould obtrude his rules upon us as Oracles. The Apoſtle Saint Iohn forbids us to pray for them that ſinne a ſinne unto death. But let all this be granted, what then? If it extends to every one in the duty, it muſt have the ſame extent in the motive too; but this I deny; he ſaith, elſe the motive will not reach home, nor have ſtrength enough to enforce the duty: but this likewiſe I deny; and ſhew withall, how the motive ſhall reach home, and have ſtrength enough even to enforce this duty, according to this Authors accommodation of it; albeit God hath a will not to ſave all and every one, but of all ſorts and all conditions ſome; of Kings ſome, of them that are in Authority ſome; For ſeeing God ſaves of all ſorts ſome, why ſhould not every Chriſtian Subject, pray for his Prince and Rulers, ſeeing it may be they are thoſe ſome, whom God means to ſave, even of the ranke of Princes, of the ranke of Governors, and of men in Authority. For God hath not revealed to us, who they are whom he hath elected, and who they are whom he hath reprobated. If he had, Auſtin tells us what we ſhould doe in that caſe, De Civit. Dei. lib. 21. cap. 24. Si de aliquibus it a Eccleſia certa eſſet, ut qui ſunt illi etiam noſſet, qui licet adhuc in hac vitâ ſint conſtituti, tamen praedeſtinati ſunt in aeternum ignem ire cum Diabolo, tam pro i is non or aret, quam pro ipſo. If it ſhall be farther urged, that we are to pray for all Kings, and all that are in Authority, not only for our own; I anſwer, that this is nothing agreeable to the end of ſuch prayers here expreſſed by the Apoſtle, namely, That under them we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all Godlineſſe and honeſty. And what have we here in England, to doe with the King of Bungo, that we ſhould pray for him, or for the Kings in terrâ auſtrali incognitâ, diſcovered by Ferdinando de Quir, or for the great Duke of Crapulia?
3. As for the ſecond interpretation; I doe not find it ſo uſuall with our Divines: Cajetan diſtinguiſheth here between voluntas ſigni and beneplaciti; ſo doth Aquinas, and this diſtinction of voluntas occulta and revelata, is uſually reduced to that of voluntas ſigni and beneplaciti; But voluntas ſigni, and voluntas revelata, is more congruouſly applied to the things which God commands, then to the things which God himſelfe worketh; as for example, he commands faith and repentance; and the commandements of God, are uſually called the will of God in Scripture, though improperly; and thus the diſtinction is plain. God commands one thing, but it is not neceſſary, that he ſhould will, that that which he commands ſhall come to paſſe: As for example, God commanded Abraham to ſacrifice Iſaack, yet he determined that Iſaack ſhould not be ſacrificed, as appeared by the event. In like manner he commanded Pharaoh to let Iſrael goe, yet withall told Moſes he would harden his heart, that he ſhould not let Iſrael goe. But this will of God called voluntas ſigni and Revelata, cannot ſo congruouſly be ſaid to paſſe upon mans ſalvation. Yet becauſe God may be ſaid to command ſalvation, in as much as he commands faith and repentance, that we may be ſaved; and in this ſenſe, men are exhorted ſometimes to ſave themſelves; As, Save your ſelves from this froward generation; and Save ſome out of the fire with feare; and That thou maiſt both ſave thy ſelfe and them that heare thee; therefore we are content alſo to admit of this Acts 2. 40. Jud. 23. 1 Tim. 4. 16.diſtinction, and conſider with what judgement and ſufficiency this Author doth impugne it.
1. By his firſt oppoſition, it appears, that meer ignorance bears him out againſt this diſtinction; For we doe acknowledge, that Gods revealed will, and his words revealing it, are true interpretations of his own mind and meaning; though not of ſuch a meaning as he expects ſhould be faſhioned. For he conceives that Gods will in this caſe, is only of what ſhall be done; which is moſt untrue: Hereby is only ſignified, what is mans duty to doe, although it may be God will not give him effectuall grace to doe it. As for examples ſake, when God commanded Pharaoh to let Iſrael goe; hereby was ſignified, that God would have it to be Pharaohs duty to let Iſrael goe; though withall he profeſſes to Moſes, that he would harden Pharaohs heart, whereupon he ſhould refuſe to let them goe. So when God commanded Abraham to ſacrifice Iſaack, hereby it was ſignified, that it was Gods will to make it Abrahams duty to ſacrifice his Sonne, albeit God had determined, that when Abraham came to poynt of execution of that which was enjoyned him, he would hold Abrahams hand, and content himſelfe with Abrahams readineſſe, and good heart to obey God in this.
2. As to the ſecond; it is untrue that any ſuch thing followeth as this Author pretendeth, namely, that two contrary wills ſhall be found in God; For firſt there is no contrariety in the wills here ſhaped by the Author himſelfe; thus, many ſhall be damned, and thoſe, many may be ſaved. As for the word irrevocable, wherewith this Author ſtuffes his propoſition, that is no attribute of damnation, or the manner thereof, but rather of Gods decrees; wherein ſtill he proceeds and ſpares not to foame out his own ſhame, deſiring to make Gods decrees of a revocable nature. Secondly, he underſtands not the accommodation of the diſtinction aright, which is not directly to ſalvation and immediatly, but rather to praecepta, conſilia, remedia, (as Aquinas expreſſeth it) of voluntas ſigni, which is all one in this caſe with voluntas revelata.
1. Applyed to Gods commandement, joyned with a will not to give grace to obay his commandement, thus, it's Pharaohs duty to let Iſrael goe; Tis not Gods will that Pharaoh ſhall let Iſrael goe, for he meaneth to harden his heart to the contrary.
2. Applyed to ſalvation, conſequent or not conſequent, according as men ſhall be found to obey or diſobey Gods commandement: thus, it's my will, that as many as believe and repent ſhall be ſaved, and conſequently it's true, If thou believeſt (whoever thou art) and repenteſt, thou ſhalt be ſaved. I will give grace to believe and repent to ſome only, whereby they may be ſaved; between thoſe in like manner, there is no contrariety at all.
3. And if there be no contrariety at all, then ſurely it followes not by this Authors Logick, that if one of them be good, the other muſt be bad. I ſay by this Authors Logick; for now adaies men are given ſo much to Rhetorick, that they forget all good Logick, if ever they learnt any: who I pray gives any ſuch rule, that if one contrary be good, the other muſt be bad? If heat be good, is cold bad? Or if white be good, is black bad? But as for the caſe we treat of, if theſe wills were found to be contrary, one of them ſhould deſtroy the other, and the other ſhould have no being at all; and in caſe it hath no being, ſhall it be ſaid to be bad? Yes, like enough, by the learning of the Arminians. I come to the Fifth.
DISCOURSE. SECT. V.
2. PEter 3. 9. Not willing that any ſhould periſh, but that all ſhould come to repentance. This Scripture is not ſo liable to thoſe exceptions, which are made againſt the former teſtimonies, for it is a negative propoſition, and muſt be taken diſtributively; and therefore ſpeaks that in plain termes, which is contrary to abſolute reprobation.
That which is uſually replied is this, that the perſons here ſpoken of, are the Elect only. God is not willing that any of the Elect ſhould periſh. But the contrary appears plainly in the Text; for the perſons here ſpoken of, are thoſe towards whom God exerciſeth much long ſuffering and patience; and who are they? Are they the Elect only, or chiefly? No, but the Reprobates rather, that dye for their contempt of grace. Reprobates are the proper objects of Gods long ſuffering and patience, as we may ſee, Rom. 2. 4. where the Apoſtle ſpeaking of ſuch as goe on in ſinne, and treaſure up unto themſelves wrath againſt the day of wrath, ſaith that God uſeth patience towards them, that ſo he might lead them to repentance: and Rom. 9. 22. He endureth (ſaith the Text) with much long ſuffering the veſſells of wrath fitted to deſtruction. Reprobates therefore as well as others doth Peter here ſpeak of, and ſaith, that God would have none of them to periſh; if they doe periſh, it is their own fault and folly, and not Gods abſolute pleaſure, who would have none to periſh.
TWISSE. Conſideration.
HEre be odde gambolls; as when he ſaith the propoſition here is negative, whereas the propoſitions are two, and the latter affirmative, as well as the former is negative. As for the taking of it diſtributively, as he ſpeaks, the Text expreſſeth the negative distributively; implying belike, that when we interpreted the former place de generibus ſingulorum, it was not to be taken diſtributively, which is a very ſhallow conceit, for it is apparent we diſtribute it de generibus ſingulorum; and more then that, of the particulars of each kind, only we doe not diſtribute it of all the particulars. In like manner, though the Text in this place expreſſeth a diſtribution, ſaying, not willing, any to periſh, this diſtribution is not extended to all: Nay, it admits of a greater limitation then the former place did by our interpretation; for foreign here muſt be referred to that which goes before in theſe words, God is patient to us ward not willing any to periſh, that is, foreign, any of us to periſh, but all to come to repentance, that is foreign, all of us; which can admit of no other ſenſe then all ſuch as the Apoſtle was; he ſaith it is contrary to abſolute reprobation; that is wind; when he proveth it then we will believe it, his word is no oracle.
2. Let us ſee how he diſproves their interpretation, who accommodate it to Gods Elect. The perſons here mentioned (he ſaith) are thoſe towards whom God exerciſeth long ſuffering and patience, and demandeth whether theſe are the Elect only or chiefly? and anſwereth himſelfe negatively; ſaying, that the reprobates are the proper objects of Gods long ſuffering and patience, which he proveth out of Rom. 2. 4. and Rom. 9. 22. and ſo concludes the argument very learnedly and judiciouſly Arminian like, ex omnibus affirmativis, in ſecundâ Figurâ; which of what force it is every weak Logician knoweth; for thus in effect is his argument, They of whom God will have none to periſh, are ſuch towards whom God expreſſeth much long ſuffering and patience; But the Reprobates are they towards whom God expreſſeth much long ſuffering and patience; Therefore the Reprobates are they, of whom God will have none to periſh.
2. And whereas the Apoſtle ſaith, God is patient towards us, the meaning according to this Authors judicious enlargement is, towards us who are partly elect and partly reprobates: and ſo likewiſe when he ſaith, 2 Pet. 1. 2. To you who have obtained like precious faith with us, that is, with us of whom ſome are elect and ſome reprobates. And 1 Pet. 1. 3. God hath begotten us to a lively hope, by the reſurrection of Jeſus Chriſt, that is, begotten us, ſome of whom are elect and ſome reprobates.
3. Now becauſe the Apoſtle ſaith plainly and ſimply, who is patient towards us; this Author deſiring to frame it in a ſuitable manner, to that of the Apoſtle, Rom. 2. 4. whereunto he hath a hungry deſire to reduce it, therefore he makes bold to ſay, that the perſons here mentioned by Saint Peter are ſuch, towards whom God exerciſeth long ſuffering and patience: Thus again he is willing very obſequiouſly to follow Lyſanders counſell, who adviſed, when a Lyons skinne would not ſerve the turne, to piece it up with a Foxe skinne. We on the other ſide, though it cannot be denied, but that God doth foreign towards ſuch as Saint Peter was, and thoſe to whom he wrote, who had obtained like precious faith with himſelfe and his fellow Apoſtles, and other believers; which cannot be denied to have been the elect of God, (ſo he calls them to whom he wrote, 1 Pet. 1. 2.) yet we ſpare to draw any argument therehence, becauſe we know ful well, that God doth foreign, and uſeth long ſuffering towards the Reprobates alſo. So that we could not conclude that we would herehence, but either by a Syllogiſme vitious in the forme, as this Author doth, or by a Syllogiſme, that would be as faulty in the matter, thus; God ſhewes patience to none but Reprobates; they of whom God will have none to periſh are ſuch, as towards whom God ſhewes patience; therefore God will not have any Reprobate to periſh. And is not this a proper doctrine, that God will not have any Reprobate to periſh, both for the overthrowing of Gods omnipotency; for is it not a cleare caſe and undeniable, that all Reprobates doe periſh? As alſo for the overthrowing of Gods immutability; for can it be denied, that when God damnes them, he will have them to periſh? Which if before he would not, can it be avoided, but that Gods will muſt be changed? And laſtly, for the bringing in of manifeſt contrariety into the will of God; ſeeing they dare not deny that God did from everlaſting ordaine every reprobate unto damnation: I ſay they dare not deny this in plain termes, though their carriage is ſuch, as if their meaning were, that Gods will in decreeing their damnation is conditionall quoad actum volentis, as touching the very act of willing, whence it followeth that God ſhall not will their damnation untill their death in infidelity and impenitency; for it is fit the condition ſhould exiſt before the thing conditionated, whoſe exiſtence depends thereupon. As for that he addes in the cloſe, If they doe periſh it is their own fault and folly; we make no queſtion hereof, though nevertheleſſe we may well maintain, that it is Gods abſolute pleaſure, not to take them off from their ſinfull and fooliſh courſes, nor to ſet an end to theſe vitious courſes of theirs, which he could if it pleaſed him, as well as he did ſet an end to the abominable courſes of Manaſſes, as alſo to the perſecution and bloudy courſes of Saul; towards whom he did undoubtedly foreign, and exerciſe much long ſuffering and patience; though herein there is no difference between them and reprobates, or very little; according to that of Auſtin, Iſtorum neminem (non praedeſtinatorum) adducit Deus ad ſalubrem ſpiritualem que paenitentiam, quâ homo Deo reconciliatur in Chriſto; ſive illis ampliorem paenitentiam, ſive non imparem praebeat: contrà Julian. Pelagian. lib. 5. cap. 4. I come to the laſt of this ranke.
DISCOURSE. SECT. VI.
TO Theſe teſtimonies, I may adde thoſe conditionall ſpeeches, if thou ſeek him he will be found of thee; but if thou forſake him he will caſt thee off, for ever, 1 Chron. 28. 9. If ye ſeek him, he will be found of you; but if you forſake him, he will forſake you. 2 Chron. 15. 2. If thou doe well, ſhalt thou not be accepted? but if thou doſt ill, ſinne lies at the doore. Gen. 4. 7. The juſt ſhall live by faith, but if any man withdraw himſelfe, my ſoule non approbabit eum, ſhall have no pleaſure in him, he ſhall be a Reprobate. In all theſe and many other places it is cleare (for ought I can ſee) that God forſakes no man, conſidered ſimply in the fall, till by actuall ſinnes and continuance in them he forſakes God. Now if God reject no man from Salvation in time or in act and deed, till he rejects God, then ſurely he rejected no man in purpoſe and decree, but ſuch a one as he foreſaw, would reject and caſt off him. For Gods acts in time, are regulated by his decrees before time. Epheſ. 1. 11. God worketh all things (ſaith the Apoſtle) according to the counſell of his own will; and therefore there muſt be an exact conformity between them, as between regulam and regulatum, the rule and the thing meaſured by the rule. By whatſoever therefore God doth in the World, we may know what he purpoſed to doe before the World; and by his actuall caſting men off, when they grow rebellious and impenitent, and not before, we may certainly gather, that he decreed to caſt them off, for their foreſeen rebellion and impenitency, and not before. Beſides it is all one in ſubſtance, to caſt a man off indeed, and to entertain a reſolution to doe it; our velle and facere are all one in Gods account, and the reaſon is, becauſe where there is a deliberate and ſetled will, the deed will follow, if nothing hinder; much more is Gods will and deed all one, ſeeing his will is omnipotent, and irreſiſtible, and whatſoever he wills directly and abſolutely, is certainly done when the time comes.
All theſe plain Scriptures doth this opinion contradict in terminis, and not only theſe, but the whole courſe of Scriptures, by which it is much ſafer for a man to frame his opinions, then by a few places pickt up here and there, and thoſe obſcure ones too: What Saint Auſtin ſpeaks in another place, I may ſafely ſay in this, numquid ideo negandum quod apertum eſt, quia comprehendi non poteſt, quod occultum eſt? Shall we contradict plain places, becauſe we cannot comprehend the obſcure? Aug. de bono perſever. c. 14. Secundum plura (ſaith Tertullian) pauciora ſunt intelligenda; foreign ne unus ſermo ſubvertat alios; ſecundum omnes potius quam adverſum omnes intelligendus erit, A few teſtimonies muſt be expounded according to the whole courſe of Scriptures, and not this according to a few teſtimonies. This is my firſt reaſon.
TWISSE Conſideration.
TO the places of Scripture here alleadged, I give the interpretation, to prevent the confuſion of things that differ, which all affect who preferre the darkneſſe of Errour before the light of truth; for it is moſt advantageous to ſuch, to fiſh in troubled waters.
To the two firſt, I ſay; God is firſt ſought of us before we find him, as touching the obtaining of many bleſſings at the hands of God according to that, Ezech. 36. 37. I will yet be ſought of the houſe of Iſrael, to performe it unto them. But as touching the obtaining of an heart to ſeek him, thus God is found of us before we ſeek him; according to that, Eſ. 65. 1. I have been found of them that ſought me not: witneſſe Saul marching with a commiſſion from the Prieſts to Damaſcus, to bind all that called on the name of Jeſus.
To the third I anſwer, by diſtinguiſhing acceptation, as we diſtinguiſh love; Love is either complacentiae or beneficentiae; ſo acceptation is either unto reward, or unto complacency; Rewards alwaies follow our doing well; but grace of doing well is alwaies a fruit of Gods favour towards us in Chriſt.
To the laſt the juſt ſhall live by faith; But there is a grace of God preventing faith; cur ille credat, ille non credat, what is the reaſon but the meere pleaſure of God giving the grace of Faith to one, and denying it to another, according to that of the Apoſtle, He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth. They that withdraw themſelves my ſoule ſhall have no pleaſure in them; The meaning is, they ſhall feele the ſmart of his diſpleaſure; but before they withdrew themſelves God took not that pleaſure in them, as to give them his cuſtodient grace, to keep them from withdrawing themſelves; which grace, and that out of his good pleaſure he afforded unto others: But this grace comes in no account throughout with this Author, like unto the Remonſtrants, who would have no other notice taken of any other counſell of God, then that whereby he decreeth to ſave believers and damne unbelievers. But if you call them to enquire of Gods decree, to beſtow the grace of Faith and repentance upon ſome, and not on others; as whether it proceeds abſolutely or conditionally, they uſually lend a deafe eare to this; whereby it is as cleare as the Sunne, what eſtimation they make of the grace of regeneration, of the grace of Faith, and of repentance; and after what manner they give God the glory of it. By the way obſerve I pray, how he makes the ſtate of man in being a reprobate conſequent to his withdrawing himſelfe, which undoubtedly is a Temporall act, and accordingly the act of Reprobation, whereby a man is denominated a reprobate, to be meerely Temporall; and conſequently ſuch an act muſt election be alſo, viz. not eternall but Temporall.
Still he keepeth himſelfe in his ſtrength of confuſion, as moſt advantageous for him; as in ſaying, God forſakes no man, till by actuall ſinnes and continuance in them he forſaketh God. But albeit God forſaketh no man, as touching the inflicting of puniſhment, untill man commits actuall ſinne, and continueth therein impenitently; yet before this God did forſake him, as touching the denyall of this grace cuſtodient from ſinne; and the denyall of the grace of repentance to riſe out of ſinne, which yet he grants to many; as in ſhewing mercy to whom he will, like as whom he will he hardneth, and ſo accordingly cures in ſome, that naturall infidely and hardneſſe of heart wherein we are all borne, and leaves it uncured in others. Now conſider we his argument following, which is this. If God reject no man from ſalvation in time, or in act and deed till he reject God, then ſurely he rejected no man in purpoſe and decree, but ſuch a one as he foreſaw would reject and caſt off God. Now this argument not one of our Divines deny, not only as it is applied to reprobation; but neither doe we deny it, applied unto election. For we willingly profeſſe, that like as God beſtowes ſalvation on none, but ſuch as he then findes believers, penitent, and given to good works: in like ſort wee all profeſſe, that God decrees to beſtow ſalvation on none but ſuch as he foreſeeth will believe, repent, and become ſtudious of good works. Like enough, many doe wilfully diſſemble the true ſtate of the Queſtion between us: others ignorantly miſtake it. The queſtion is not whether God decrees to beſtow ſalvation on ſuch as he foreſeeth will believe, and reject thoſe from ſalvation whom he foreſeeeth will not believe; but of the order of reaſon between theſe decrees of God, and the foreſight of obedience the one ſide, and diſobedience on the other; that is, whether like as faith, repentance, and good works in men of ripe years doe precede their ſalvation, as diſpoſing cauſes thereunto; ſo the fore-ſight of faith, repentance, and good works, precede election, as diſpoſing cauſes or prerequiſites thereunto. In like manner on the other ſide, whether, as finall perſeverance in ſinne precedes damnation, as the meritorious cauſe thereof; So finall perſeverance in ſinne as foreſeen by God precedes reprobation as the decree of Damnation, as the meritorious cauſe thereof: So that the argument here mentioned (which is all his ſtrength in this place) rightly applyed muſt runne thus. Faith, repentance, and good works actually exiſtent precede ſalvation, as the diſpoſing cauſes thereunto; therefore faith, repentance, and good works foreſeen precede election, as the diſpoſing cauſes thereunto; and what is this, but as good as in expreſſe termes to profeſſe, that election is of faith, repentance, and good works: though it be in direct contradiction unto Saint Paul, profeſſing in terminis (to ſpeak in this Divines language) that the purpoſe of God according to election is not of works. So on the other ſide, Finall perſeverance in ſinne precedes damnation, as the meritorious cauſe thereof; therefore finall perſeverance in ſinne foreſeen, precedes the decree of damnation, as the meritorious cauſe thereof. And then what is to make reprobation to be of evill works, if this be not? Whereas Saint Paul, look by what arguments he proves that election is not of good works, viz. becauſe before Jacob and Eſau were borne, or had done good or evill, it was ſaid of them the Elder ſhall ſerve the Younger: by the ſame argument it is equally evident that Reprobation is not of evill works. Yet we acknowledge an exact conformity between Gods decrees and the execution thereof: becauſe like as God damnes no man but for ſinne, ſo he decreed to damne no man but for ſinne: where ſinne is in each place made the meritorious cauſe of damnation, not of the decree of damnation. And like as God beſtowes ſalvation on no man of ripe years, but by way of reward of faith, repentance, and good works, ſo he decreed to beſtow ſalvation on no man of ripe years, but by way of reward of faith, repentance, and good works; where faith repentance and good works, are in each place made the diſpoſing cauſes to ſalvation, but not to election. There was never any ſo madde (ſaith Aquinas) as to ſay that merits are the cauſe of predeſtination, as touching the act of God predeſtinating, and Why? but becauſe ſo is the cauſe of predeſtination to be enquired into, as the cauſe of Gods will is enquired into: but formerly he had ſhewed that there can be no cauſe of Gods will, as touching the act of God willing: Now let every one judge whether the act of reprobation, be not as clearly the act of Gods will, as the act of predeſtination; and conſequently whether it be not equally as mad a courſe (in Aquinas his judgement) to deviſe a cauſe of reprobation, as to deviſe a cauſe of predeſtination on the part of Gods will. And no marvail, for the act of Gods will is eternall, all the works of the creature are temporall: Then, the act of Gods will is God himſelfe, for there is no accident in God; and therefore they may as well ſet themſelves to deviſe a cauſe of God, as a cauſe of Gods will. His phraſe of caſting off, is ambiguous; if it ſignifieth the denyall of ſalvation, it followeth diſobedience; if it ſignifieth the deniall of grace, it precedes diſobedience, in what kind ſoever.
3. Our velle and facere are both temporall; in God it is otherwiſe; for his deeds are temporall, and may admit the works of men precedaneous thereunto; but his reſolutions are his decrees, and they are all eternall, and can admit no work of man precedaneous thereunto; yet is God as juſt in the one as in the other. For like as he damnes no man but for ſinne, ſo he never decreed to damne any man but for ſinne; But as touching the grace of regeneration, the grace of faith and repentance, in the granting and denying of this, the Apoſtle plainly tells us, he proceeds meerly according to the good pleaſure of his will; as when he ſaith, The Lord hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth: And here alſo God is as juſt in his decrees as in his executions. For if it be juſt with him, to give this grace to whom he will, and deny it to whom he will; it is as juſt with him, to decree the giving of it to whom he will, and the denying of it alſo to whom he will. And why ſhall not the Lord take liberty to cure infidelity and hardneſſe of heart in whom he will, as he cured it in Manaſſes and Saul; and leave it uncured in whom he will, as he left it uncured in many a proud Phariſee, and proud Philoſopher, notwithſtanding all their Morality they boaſted of? Very ſeaſonably he confeſſeth Gods will to be omnipotent and irrefiſtible, when nevertheleſſe, he makes him to will the ſalvation of all Reprobates, though not one of them is ſaved. But by that which followes, by will omnipotent and irrefiſtible, it ſeems he underſtandeth only will abſolute, which he diſtinguiſheth from will conditionate, which can be no other (I ſuppoſe) then this, my will is that all and every one ſhall be ſaved, in caſe he believe and repent. Now ſeeing it is as true, that 'tis Gods will that they ſhall be damned, in caſe they believe not and repent not, let every ſober man judge, whether this deſerve to be accounted, a will of ſaving rather then a will of damning; eſpecially in caſe all men naturally, are farre more prone to infidelity and impenitency, then to faith and repentance. As for a will conditionate in God, like enough this Author carryeth it hand over head without diſtinction, as he doth many other things beſides: whereas no ſuch will is agreeable to the divine nature, quoad actum volentis, as touching the act of willing, as both Bradwardine by clear reaſon, and Piſcator out of the word of God have demonſtrated, but only quoad res volitas, as touching the things willed by him.
4. I have ſhewed the poverty of his performances, by the particular examination of every place alleadged by him, and made it plain, how he betraies his own nakedneſſe of interpretation of Scripture, and of argumentation throughout; and therewithall, the vanity of this his boaſt, that our doctrine of abſolute reprobation, doth contradict theſe plain Scriptures. But he like a brave fellow well conceited of his atchievements, and having thereby gotten ſome authority to himſelfe, is bold to give his word, that it contradicts alſo the whole courſe of Scripture; which I verily believe he is as well able to performe, as he hath performed the former; and very judiciouſly takes upon him to diſtinguiſh between the whole courſe of Scriptures, and a few places pickt up here and there, as if they were no part of the whole courſe of Scripture: Belike by reaſon of their obſcurity, as he pretends, no matter if they were expunged; like as owles are offended with day-light. Our Saviour tells us of ſome that loved darkneſſe rather then light, becauſe their deeds were evill. None hate the light of Gods truth, more then ſuch as are poſſeſſed with errours, as with familiar ſpirits, eſpecially when they have been found to play the Apoſtates from Gods truth. Whether I have daſhed my ſelfe upon the rocks of Auſtins cenſure, by contradicting any Scripture that he hath brought, or only his corrupt and vile interpretation and accommodation of them, let the indifferent judge. Yet what more plain then this, Gods purpoſe of election is not of works; eſpecially compared with the manner how Saint Paul proves it. What more plain then this? God hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardneth. It is apparent he utterly declines the criticall point of theſe controverſies, which is as touching Gods giving grace, even the grace of faith and repentance; and of what ſpirit that ſavoureth let every one judge. As for interpreting any place, we doe not abridge his liberty in interpreting it after what manner he thinks good, but we are ready to weigh it, and if we find it too light, to eſteem of it as it deſerves: neither doe we refuſe to take into conſideration, what he or any of his complices are pleaſed to inſiſt upon.