The Pagan Preacher Silenced, Text (2 of 4)

The Pagan Preacher Silenced · Text (2 of 4)

p. 30Peter Martyr is expreſſe againſt him, the prayſe of the miniſtery is here repeated, and Paul ſpeaketh not of the internal word or hearing, but of the external preaching to which the Apoſtles were called.

Beza in his annotations is againſt him thus; faith comes by hearing, that is, as in Iſaiah 57.19. faith is the fruit of the lips. And that he meaneth by it oral preaching, appeareth by his after wordccFides eſt ex auditu, hoc eſt, quod dicitur Iſa. 57 19. fidem eſſe f…uctum labiorū. Auditus eſt ex verbo, ie, ex mandato Dei â qun mittuntur i… qui illud praedicant Beza in Annot. in loc.Isa 57:19, thus; hearing by the word, that is, by the command of God by which they are commanded that preach the Goſpel.

Bullinger in his comment, ſaith thus;ddFides eſt ex auditurjam quia illū per prophetas abundè habu ſtis, non habetis quo peccato veſtro praetexatis. Bulling. in loc. faith comes by hearing, that is, becauſe ye have had this abundantly by the Prophets, ye have no cloak for your ſin.

Deodate expreſſely referreth his interpretation as if he had purpoſely p. 31met with it, who in his annotations ſaith, Faith is by hearing, not reſolved into natural principles, or diſcourſe of reaſon, but onelyonly by the declaration that is made thereof to men.

Cornel. è Lapid. though one of his owne ſide, giveth his teſtimony full againſt him: eeInde ſequitur quod fides quâ credimus Chriſto & evangelio eſſe exauditu, pura per praedicationem apoſtolorum cui m…ſſi…e…ant ad praedicandum. Cornel è Lapid in loc.therefore it followeth, that this faith by which we believe in Chriſt and the Goſpel is by hearing, namely, by the Apoſtles who were ſent to preach as his Ambaſſadors,

Rivet amongſt the reſt, in his Comment on Pſal. 19.4. citing this text of Paul, Rom. 10.18. though he think it meant of the heavens, yet he ſaith, the Apoſtle by it proves that they had the Goſpel, becauſe ffAmplificatio gratiae Dei per coelos amplio. i evangelicae doctrinae praeludiſi. Rivet. in loc.the patefaction of the glory of God by the heavens was but praelude to the more ample knowledge of the Goſpel. What ſhould I produce more evidences upon ſuch an unequal ballance? when he ſhall prove his interpretation but by the mouth of two ſufficient witneſſes, which is as little as can be in a buſineſſe of ſo great importance, I ſhall ſay more; but hitherto it doth not appeare that that hearing, by which the Apoſtle ſaith, faith comes, is the hearing of the ſound of the heavens, but of the oral preaching of the Goſpel.

And as for that other queſtion, have they not heard? Interpreters give it of the letter of the goſpel: as for the words, that follow (yea verily, their ſound is gone out through the world, Some, as Calvin and Pareus, with ſome others, would have them to relate only to the heavens, and the volume of the creatures; yet in ſuch a ſenſe as will not ſerve Mr. Goodwin at all; for thoſe latter words they ſay are as an argument to prove, that God had and would diſpenſe the Goſpel to thoſe Gentiles to whom he had from the beginning given means of the knowledge of himſelfe by the creatures, ſo that the latter clauſe is brought to prove that they had certainly heard the letter of the goſpel, which is the thing which the former queſtion ſeemes to demand, yea, and vehemently to affirm. Have they not heard? It is as much as (yes verily) they have heard, and that the goſpel orally preached, and thus interpreters generally give it.

Paraeus thus, aaVbſque terratū praeconio apoſtolotum nunciatum eſt evangel…um. Paraeus in loc.[the goſpel is preached by the Apoſtles all the world over.]

Piſcator thus,bbApoſtelus recitat per alluſi…nē verba Pſalmi, quae propriè de coelis loquuntur, ſed Paulus de apoſtolis uſurpat, & evangelii praedicationem, & ſenſus eſt, non minus ſon…ſſe per totum orbem quam coeli praecones. Piſcat. in loc. [the Apoſtle reciteth by way of alluſion the words of the Pſalmiſt, which are properly ſpoken of the heavens, but the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of the preachers of the Goſpel, that they have ſounded through the world.]

Peter Martyr thus, ccPaulus volens amplificare publicationem evangelii, alt, nonne audiverunt Dei praecones qu… ſunt inſtar coelorum? hic habemus, nec allegoriam, ſed metaphoram Peter Martyr in loc.[ Paul willing to amplifie the publication of the goſpel, ſaith, have they not heard the preachers of God, which are as the heavens, and ſo we have not an alluſion, nor an allegory, but a metaphor.]

Toſſanus thus, ddSimpliciter ai… in omnem terra… ̄ exivit ſonus eorum, i e. evangelizantium pacem in montibus de quibus ſupra egerit, ceſenſus eſt, non minus evangelii quam coelorum ſonum ſonuiſſe Toſſanus in loc.[he ſaith ſimply, the ſound of (them) is gone out through all the earth, that is, of thoſe that bring the glad tidings of peace, of whom hee had ſpoken before, and the ſenſe this; the p. 32found of the Goſpel is no leſſe diffuſed then the ſound of the heavens]

Millet in his Hexapla, thus; [The Pſalmiſt ſpeaks litterally of the heavens, but prophetically of the Apoſtles, and Paul uſeth thoſe words as denoting the accompliſhment, and though this place bee meant of the Gentiles, yet it is alſo meant of the ſound of the goſpel.]

Deodate ſpeakes thus; ["Is it becauſe they have not heard? No, "for like the Sun, the Goſpel runneth all over the world.

Junius in his parallels thus; eeVerbum ipſum De et doctrinā evangelii fuiſſe propoſitum Iudaeis, non in angu lo, ſed in publico in toto mundo & per apoſtolorum miniſterium. Junius Paral. par. 19.[The word of God, and doctrine of the goſpel was propounded to the Jewes not in a corner, but in publick as before the ſun, through the whole world, and that by the miniſtry of the Apoſtles.]

Cornel. à Lapid. thus; [ ffNonne de facto auditum haberent? nonnt evangelium audiverut omnes gentes? imò audiverunt. Cornel. à Lapid. in loc,Have they not heard indeed? have not all "nations heard of the Goſpel? yea, they have heard.] And if Mr. Goodwin will undertake to uſe authority in this, let him addreſſe himſelfe to it, hee ſhall be followed: foreign; onelyonly I deſire him to quote the words themſelves, that I may examine their teſtimonies. And till he bring more to aſſert his cauſe, then I have done to overthrow it; I muſt conclude his interpretation a meere forgery againſt a cleare text, and ſo adjudged by conſent of interpreters.

2. His interpretation appears to be a forgery againſt a clear text, ſo adjudged by the Remonſtrants, and the beſt of his own fide. The Collocutors at the conferenc at the Hague, in anſwer to our 5^th argument, anſwer thus; ggPropoſitio iſta ut à fratribus cō cepta eſt (ſcilicet) evangelium non omnibus praedicari, apertis ſcripturis contradicitur. Rom. 10, 18. vocem Apoſtolorum per totum mundum iviſſe. Collat. Hag. 180.Rom 10:18[That propoſition as it is formed by our brethren, viz. the goſpel was not preached to all men without exception, is contradicted by clear Scriptures, Rom. 10.18. the voice of the Apoſtles is gone out through the world.] In which text they doe confeſſe that this word (them) in the text, (the voice of them) is to be underſtood of the Apoſtles, and therefore they read it not the voice of (them,) but the voice of the Apoſtles. Now whether they did uſe this word as the text, or as the Comment, let Mr. Goodwin examine, or whether of the two be, it is ſufficient againſt him. Corvinus upon the ſame argument ſaith thus; [How the Apoſtles are ſaid to preach the goſpel to every creature, as in Col. 1.24. Rom. 10.18. Mark. 16.21. it is neceſſary for us to enquire, though the words be cleare.] Wherein he granteth, that it is cleare, that the ſound of the Apoſtles went through all the world, and that from this very text, Rom. 10.18. Therefore certainely this text is not meant of the ſound of the heavens, but of the goſpel, and that as preached by the Apoſtles.

3. And is not his owne judgement as cleare? if we may gather his judgement out of his writings, and it will appeare a meer forgery againſt a cleare text adjudged by the expreſſions that come from his owne pen. To this purpoſe I deſire Mr. Goodwin to conſult the 32, 33, 34. pages of his treatiſe,pag. 32, 33, 34. where he takes occaſion to handle this very text, but very unhandſomely for his purpoſe, in which pages hee makes an abrupt tranſiſion from his propounded buſineſſe in page 31.pag. 31. to the oral preaching of the Goſpel by the Apoſtles, and his intention is to prove p. 33that their preaching of it in ſome eminent places is virtually and conſtructively the preaching of it to the whole world, as he ſaith pag. 34. Now to this purpoſe he models thoſe demands, Ro. 10.16. How ſhal they believe on him in whom they have not heard? How ſhall they hear without a preacher? Mr Goodwin ſaith, that the import of thoſe interogatories, is this; That they were not like to hear of God, or of Jeſus Chriſt in the goſpel, had there not been ſome one or more to have preached & publiſhed it to the world. Thus in pag 33. and when in pag. the thirty fourth,pag. 33 he aſſerts that the Apoſtles had orally preached the Goſpel virtually and conſtructively through the whole world, he proves it by this very text, Rom. 10.18. verily their ſound is gone out through the world. But certainely if this text, pag. 34. clearely ſignifies the conſtructive oral preaching to the whole world by the Apoſtles, it is very weakly produced in the 10. pag. to prove that the hearing there mentioned is the hearing of the ſound of the heavens. And if he ſay in one place, that the text is meant of the Apoſtles preaching; I wonder he is of ſuch an untamed forehead to forge ſuch a ſenſe againſt the text, as to ſay that by hearing, is meant the hearing of the ſound of the heavens, and the day, and the night.

4. His interpretation is a meer forgery againſt a cleare text, if we look onelyonly to the genius of the whole chapter, which undoubtedly proceeds of the oral preaching of the goſpel, as ver. 8. this is the word of faith which we preach; and ver. 11 it is the ſcripture, not the heavens that ſpeak: and thus till it come to ver. 14. to thoſe interogatories, how ſhal they believe on him in whom they have not heard? how ſhall they heare without a preacher? And that all theſe interogatories are underſtood of the oral preaching of the goſpel, if Mr. Goodwin did not acknowledge it pag. 31, 32. I ſhould eaſily prove it. Some I confeſſe may be ſo perverſe, but none ſo blind as to think that thoſe words, (preaching,) (hearing,) (word,) (goſpel,) (believing,) ſo often repeated in this chapter, are not underſtood, and relate to the oral preaching of the Goſpel, and in the letter of it. And thus till he produce further proofe on all hands, we ſhall conclude his interpretation a meer forgery againſt a clear text, and ſo adjudged againſt him by the current of interpreters, the judgement of the beſt of his owne ſide, his own expreſſes, and the cleare genius of the whole chapter.

2. Having examined his interpretation, I proceed to the confirmation and illuſtration of his interpretation: He would eſtabliſh it by affirming that the voice of the heavens, and the night, and the day, and the words which they ſpeak, are the words of eternal life, as well as thoſe which Chriſt himſelfe ſpake when he was upon earth: which I charged with impious blaſphemy, and proceed thus to make it good. If to affirme any thing from Chriſt that derogateth either from the dignity of his perſon or office, be truely to be termed blaſphemy, then they may be termed ſo; for herein he doth both advance the creatures into the Chaire of Chriſt, and reduce Chriſt into the ranke of the creatures.

p. 34Chriſt hath received an univerſal charter and patent to bee the publiſher of the Goſpel, and that out of his mouth ſhould proceed the words of eternal life, according to that text Luke 4.18. the ſpirit of the Lord is upon me, to preach, &c. We find a dicotomy in Heb. 2:2. of Gods ſpeaking by the prophets, and ſpeaking by his Son; but of his ſpeaking the things of the goſpel by the heavens, no where. Had ſuch a pregnant ſuggeſter ſtood at Peters elbow when he asked this queſtion; ["Whither ſhall we goe Lord? thou haſt the words of eternal life, Ioh. "6.68.] he would have told him, that he was not a well tutoured ſcholler in the ſchoole of Chriſt. And as the wiſeman ſends the ſluggard to the ant, ſo he would have ſent Peter to the heavens, the Moon, and the Sun, and Stars, to hear them preach the words of eternal life. What futilouſneſſe and vanity doth this aſſertion of his introduce into the words of the Apoſtle? 2 Tim. 1.10. [But is made appear by the appearing of Jeſus Chriſt, who hath brought immortality and life to light through the goſpel.] And this goſpel is that which Paul was appointed to preach in the next verſe; what need the Apoſtle wrap up all in expreſſions at ſuch a diſtance, as to ſay, (Now) it is manifeſt, and that by the coming of (Chriſt:) and that (Hee) hath brought immortality and life to light; And that in that (Goſpel) which Paul was ſent to preach; if that life and immortality, and the ſaving grace of God be clearely diſcovered by the creatures? Nay, I intreat Mr. Goodwin to conſider whether he doth not by this introduce a needleſneſſe and uſeleſneſſe of Chriſt coming to diſcover the myſteries of the goſpel to the Gentiles, or of any oral preaching thereof, either to Jew or Gentile, if that in the heavens and the creatures there be ſo much ſeen of the Goſpel, as to make men wiſe unto ſalvation. And ſo good old Simeon muſt ſtand charged rather with dotage then devotion, in waiting for Chriſt to be the light of the Gentiles. How doth he in this utterly make voyd the dignity and preheminence of the Scriptures, which are ſaid to make men wiſe to ſalvation? 2 Tim. 3.15. and to be the words of eternal life? Ioh. 5.39. If that both theſe may be as truly recorded of the book of the creatures, as of the book of the Scriptures. Laſtly, let Mr. Goodwin upon better thoughts conſider, whether the creatures, and the motions of the heavens be truly and properly ſaid to carry in them the words of eternal life at all.

1. We find the Scriptures, the words which Chriſt and his Apoſtles orally preached to the world, to be called the word of Life. Phil. 2.16. ſo Ioh. 6.63. ["the words which I ſpeak unto you are life.] And the words of eternal life, in many texts. But I intreat Mr Goodwin to produce one text, that either expreſſely, or by intimation calls the ſound of the heavens ſo. Me thinks his reaſon ſhould beſpeak it too great preſumption for any man to make the words of Chriſt to bee no more the words of eternal life, then the ſound of the heavens, which never in Scripture are honoured with that dignifying title.

2. The words of eternal life muſt diſcover not only God, but Chriſt, without the knowledg of both, no ſalvation, Iohn 17.3. ["This is life eternal "to know God, and Jeſus Chriſt whom thou haſt ſent.] But how long p. 35long will it be ere he prove that the creatures can give the knowledge of Chriſt. I expect that Mr. Goodwin give me ſome pertinent Scriptures to prove it. Pſal. 19.1, 2, 3, 4. Rom. 1.20 Act. 17.27. go no further then the glorie of God, the inviſible things of God, and that they might ſeek after God: but that the creatures of themſelves diſcover a Chriſt, the Scriptures ſay no where.

3. The words of eternal life are the charter and magna charta of the Church. Hence he knowes it is a rule, extra eccleſiam nulla ſalus: and alſo that of the Apoſtle, Act. 2.47. ["The Lord added to the "Church ſuch as ſhould be ſaved.] To be brought into the Church, was to be brought (in ſeriem ſalvandorum) and both by the word of eternal life. Then if the heavens declare the words of eternal life, either that diſtinction betwixt the church of Chriſt and them that are without, falls to the ground, or elſe the word of eternal life is given, as the ordinary means to bring men to faith in Jeſus Chriſt, to others, beſides the Church of God. And then what tranſcendent love is there in Chriſt towards the Church, in waſhing of it with water by the word? Eph, 5.25, 26

4. The words of eternal life muſt convert the ſoule, open the eyes, make wiſe the ſimple, otherwiſe they are not to bee called the words of eternal life. But if Mr. Goodwin ſay that the creatures and voice of the heavens doe convert the ſoule, &c. then let him conſider whether hee doth not overthrow that plaine diſtinction of the Pſalmiſt, Pſ. 19.4. 6, 7, 8. where he ſaith, the heavens declare the glory of God, and the law converteth the ſoule. He ſpeaketh not of converting the ſoule, til he paſſeth by the heavens, and ſpeaketh of the law of God.

5. The word of eternal life is the ordinary meanes which God hath appointed to bring men to life. But if Mr. Goodwin ſay, that the heavens and the creatures are the ordinary way to bring men to ſalvation, then he muſt prove where God hath ſo appointed them, and alſo cleare it to us, that we are brought to heaven and life by the creatures as well as by the Goſpel orally diſpenſed. Till theſe things be cleared, I cannot but judge that the creatures cannot afford of themſelves the words of eternal life. And then for Mr. Goodwin to ſay that the voyce of the heavens are the words of eternal life; as well as thoſe that Chriſt himſelfe ſpake, is in effect, to ſay that the words that Chriſt ſpake are not the words of eternal life at all; which how blaſphemous it is againſt Jeſus Chriſt the Prophet of his Church, let the world judge.

Thirdly, I charged his reaſon with weakneſſe and abſurdity; it is this, He meaneth the voice of the heavens, becauſe the Apoſtle uſeth this text, Pſ. 19.4. which words by the Pſalmiſt are ſpoken of the heavens. It is very ſtrange to me that a man of ſuch a ſearching judgement as Mr. Goodwin, ſhould be driven upon ſuch a rock by this inconſiderable guſt, and if there be (with him) ſo much weight in thoſe words, as to weigh downe all interpreters, the judgement of his owne ſide, his owne firſt-born, the natural genius of the text, hee may by his prejudice caſt the ſcale; but I am confident he cannot give good weight, eſpecially conſidering there are ſo many plauſible wayes to avoid any ſuch inference.

p. 36Calvin and Rivet, who come the neareſt his minde, and think that the latter clauſe of verſe 15, is meant of the heavens; yet that thoſe words are produced by the Apoſtle onelyonly to prove, that it is no ſtrange thing that the Gentiles ſhould have the goſpel, becauſe he had done ſo much for them in the creatures; and they are ſo far from excluding the heavens of the letter of the goſpel, that they urge it to be cleare that this queſtion, Have they not heard? is to be underſtood of the letter of the goſpel.

Others there are that are no whit of his mind, and think that the Apoſtle doth onelyonly allude to thoſe words, and adapt them to his owne purpoſe. All ſuppoſing this to be the drift of the apoſtle, to prove that the gentiles had the letter of the goſpel; the drift alſo of the Apoſtle in theſe words,Oratorio utitur, & evocat teſtem ex ipſorum lege. Soto domin. in loc. their voice is gone out, is to confirme it, and then he uſeth the Pſalmiſts words, not as meaning the heavens, or their words, but he ſpeaketh of the goſpel in theſe expreſſions, that hee might convince the Jewes the better, as by a teſtimony out of their owne law; As Soto the Dominican in his Commentary.bbWillet in hexapl. in loc. Others will tell him, that the Apoſtle uſed theſe words, although he be treating of the goſpel in the letter of it, to let them ſee that in Pſalme 19.4. it was the prophecy, but in Rom. 10.18. the accompliſhment. Thus Willet in his Hexapla.

Paraus and Soto tell us, that though he be treating of the goſpel yet he uſeth theſe words of the Pſalmiſt. either ccPari velocitate quâ ſol totum orbem permeavit, tuba etiam evangelica per totum orbem praeluſtravit. Soto & Paraus in loc.à pari, from the like, that is, With the like ſwiftneſſe that the Sun runs his courſe, doth the trumpet of the goſpel run through the world; or elſe à minori ad majus, from the leſſe to the greater, thus, if he gave them the voice of the heavens, he would give them the goſpel. And moſt interpreters part their thoughts into an alluſion, or allegory, or metaphor, as Peter Martyr gives us a hint; any of which ſheweth the invalidity of Mr, Goodwins inference.

But if theſe doe not ſatisfie, in the next place, I ſay it is a hard thing for him to prove that the Apoſtle citeth purpoſely theſe words as the text of the Pſalmiſt, and not rather onelyonly aſſerts his owne buſineſſe in the Pſalmiſts expreſſions. He ſaith indeed, the ſound of them, but of whom? here is the queſtion; but Mr. Goodwin ſaith, the ſound of the heavens, but it is with no colour of reaſon; there had not one word paſſed of the heavens, and therefore it is againſt reaſon to refer the relative to an unknowne anticedent, when there is one viſible. Toſſanus, if Mr. Goodwin will accept of reaſonable ſatisfaction, ſaith ſomething to this purpoſe; ddAit ſimpliciter ſonus eorum ivit. i. e. evangelizanrum pacem ſuper montibus, de quibus ſupra egerit, Toſſanus in loc. Hag. Col. in Arg. 5. in Col.He ſaith ſimply and onelyonly, the ſound of them is gone forth, that is of thoſe that bring glad tidings of peace, of whom he had before ſpoken. He doth not ſay, (as it is written) or thus (the Scripture ſaith,) as if he intended to cite the words of the Pſalmiſt for his own purpoſe, but ſpeaks them as his own expreſſes, the ſound of them, that is the Apoſtles that bring the glad tidings of peace: thus the Remonſtrants themſelves give it us; they conſent to read the words roundly thus, in ſtead of eorum ſonus, they read it Apoſtolorum ſonus; not the ſound of them, but the ſound of the Apoſtles: and why they do ſo, let him examine at his leiſure.

p. 37And if all this doe not ſatisfie, let him examine whether his divinity doth not ſerve him at this turn, to ſee that the Apoſtle uſeth the expreſſions of the Prophets; not to prove and aſſert that in which they were originally concerned; but that which he is to carry on a new: as ſpeaking of almes, and contributions for the Saints,2 Cor. 85.1. he ſaith hee would have all things carryed on by an equality, that the abundance of the one might be the ſupply of the other, as it is written, He that gathered much bad nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack. Will Mr. Goodwin make this inference, that the Apoſtle in verſe 14. ſpeaketh of gathering and diſtributing Manna to the Saints, becauſe he uſeth theſe expreſſes of Moſes in the 15, verſe, which were originally ſpoken in relation to the Mannah? Is it not cleare, that thoſe words which Moſes uſeth concerning Manna, the Apoſtle adapts them to his owne buſineſſe of almes.

That which David ſpake of the outward proſperity and affluence of his enemies in Pſalme 69.22. Let their table become a ſnare: Pſal. 69.22 Rom. 11.8, 9Ps 69:22Rom 11:8Rom 11:9The Apoſtle adapts them to prove, that the goſpel, their ſpiritual food, was become a ſnare to the Jew, Ro. 11.8, 9. The many thouſands that did not bow their knee to Baal in the dayes of Elijah, the Apoſtle uſeth to prove the reſerve that God had in the Apoſtles times amongſt the Jewes that were not carried downe the general deluge of infidelity,Rom. 11.4Rom 11:4 Rom. 11.4. Thoſe words that were originally ſpoken of the righteouſneſſe of the law, Deut. 30.12. Paul applyed to the righteouſneſſe of faith,Deut. 30.12 Rom. 10.6, 7, 8Deut 30:12Rom 10:6Rom 10:7Rom 10:8 Rom. 10.6, 7, 8. That which was originally ſpoken of them that brought the glad tidings of Iſraels returne from Babylon, Iſai, 52.7.Iſai. 52.7Isa 52:7 The Apoſtle applyes it to the apoſtles that brought the tidings of Chriſt in the goſpel.Rom. 10.15Rom 10:15 Rom. 10.14. And if ſo many inſtances appeare near theſe words in difference betwixt us, let Mr, Goodwin give us ſome ſolid reaſon why theſe words that were originally ſpoken of the ſound of the heavens, may not be by the Apoſtles adapted and fitted to expreſſe the ſound of the goſpel in the letter of it. Thus have I ſpent much time, and put the reader to much trouble, becauſe I would detect the forgery, blaſphemy, & abſurdity that lye hid in this interpretation of Mr. Goodwin, and that it might appeare how weakly and praepoſterouſly this text, that clearely importeth and affirmeth that the gentiles had the letter of the goſpel, is produced to prove that they are bound to believe in Chriſt, that never had the letter of the goſpel.

The ſecond text he produced to prove his aſſertion, is in Acts 14.16, 17. "He left them not without witneſſe, in that he did them good, "gave them raine from heaven, and fruitful ſeaſons. In which, if he had been pleaſed to reduce his thoughts to any argumentative form, they would more clearely have diſcovered themſelves: but hee puts his reader to a double task, both to find out his argument, and then to anſwer it. It ſeemeth to be but a wild inference, He gave them rain and fruitful ſeaſons, and left not himſelfe without witneſſe, Therfore they are bound to believe in Chriſt that have not the letter of the goſpel. True indeed, but it is chiefly inquirable, which are the witneſſes of God, p. 38and what it was that they witneſſed concerning him; if Mr. Goodwin can prove that thoſe witneſſes there ſpoken of did witneſſe a Chriſt, and a mediatour, and an attonement made by him, then Mr. Goodwin may carry the cauſe: but if not, this place is very vainly produced to prove that they are bound to believe in Chriſt that have nothing but theſe witneſſes: To clear the buſineſſe, he produceth two things under the notion of doubtleſſe; but both very obnoxious to ſcruples, not eaſily ſatisfied; the firſt, runneth thus.

[Doubtleſſe he doth not ſpeak here of his Godhead, nor power, nor wiſedome, as if God left not himſelfe without witneſſe of theſe; the works of creation diſtinct from providence, are ſufficient witneſſes of theſe, according to the tenour of Rom. 1.20.] But here is nothing leſſe out of doubt then this: and to the due underſtanding of it, it is requiſite, Firſt, to conſider the occaſion of theſe words, which wil make a fair way to the diſcovering the meaning of them.

The occaſion of them was the idolatry of the men of Lyſtra, who attempted to worſhip the Apoſtles under the notion of Gods; upon this occaſion he doth two things; Firſt, lets them ſee that they ought not to worſhip them, which he doth in the 15. verſe by two pregnant arguments, 1. The Apoſtles were men of like paſſions with them. 2. They were but the inſtruments of God to turne them to the living God. Secondly, his task is to prove that they ſhould worſhip the true and the living God; now if this be his deſign, to prove God to be the true God whom they ought to worſhip, then all thoſe things there mentioned, muſt reaſonably be underſtood of ſuch things as the ſcriptures give us to evince his deity, and ſo by them to prove that he is to be worſhipped: And I conceive, that nothing but that which treateth of, and manifeſteth his Godhead is a fit medium for any to uſe to take off idolaters from their vanity, to the true God. Beſides, will Mr, Goodwin perſiſt in this, that the Apoſtle doubtleſſe doth not here treat of his Godhead? What one word is there in the three verſes alledged, 15, 16, 17. which may not be called a fit medium to prove his diety?

1. Doth he not ſay in general, that he is (living God?) 2. Doth he not ſay, (which made the heavens and the earth?) and are not theſe words an expreſſe of his power? 3. Doth he not ſay, that he ſuffered all nations? and are not theſe an expreſſe of his ſoveraignty and power over the creatures, without which he could not properly be ſayd to ſuffer them? And 4, Doth he not ſay, he did them good, and gave them fruitful ſeaſons? and are not theſe an expreſſe of his goodneſſe, and that he is, principium et fons omnis boni, the principle and Fountaine of all good? which clearly evinceth his diety. And ſeeing the apoſtle produceth nothing but what is very apt and fit to prove the diety and godhead of the Almighty; it is a ſtrong …nducement to me to think that he produced all thoſe particulars for that every end and purpoſe. And doth he not herein keep a juſt parallel to …mſelfe in Rom. 1.20. and in Acts 17.23, 24, 25. In all the three pl…hi the occaſion is the ſame, p. 39namely, idolatry; the end the ſame, to preſerve them from idolatry; that which he preſſeth is the ſame, namely, God making the earth and all things therein; the end is the ſame: Rom. 1.20. ſaith, that they might be inexcuſable when they turned the truth of God into a lye. Acts 14, ſaith, that he left not himſelfe without witneſſe. And Act 17.23, 24. ſaith, that by groping after him they might find him; now all theſe three come to one & the ſame iſſue; when men by groping after him, find him in his works, then he hath his witneſſes; and when he hath his witneſſes, idolaters are without excuſe; and then what can be more probable then this, that all three places tend to evince the the ſame thing, that is, the Godhead and diety of the true God? And I intreate Mr. Goodwin to conſider the Apoſtle in. Act. 7.23, 24. and tel me whether he do not purpoſely in thoſe expreſſions evince the diety. In the 23. verſe he ſaith, that God which yee ignorantly worſhip, him doe I declare to you. And in the cloſe in verſe 30. that they might not think the godhead was like unto gold and ſilver, or ſtones graven by mans device; are not theſe pregnant proofes that the apoſtle doth purpoſely and pertinently evince the godhead and diety? But by what arguments doth he doe it? not onelyonly by his power in making all things, as in ver. 24, but in this, that he giveth to all life and breath (and all things.) And what is this leſſe then his giving them raine and fruitful ſeaſons? and if it appeare that his giving all things be brought to prove a diety in the 17. chapter, upon what accompt of reaſon is it doubtleſſe, that his giving fruitful ſeaſons is not urged in chap. 14. and to evince the very ſame thing?

The ſecond (doubtleſſe) that Mr. Goodwin preſumeth is this; doubtleſs the thing that God intended ſhould be witneſſed on his behalfe, was ſomething more ſecret and out of the way of mens common thoughts and apprehenſions; and particularly it was that gracious and good affection that he beareth to men in Chriſt, his inclinations to peace with them upon their repentance. That it was ſomething out of the way of mens commen thoughts and apprehenſions, I wil eaſily grant him? but wil it be any thing further off from proving it to be only his deity and godhead? Gods not needing of any thing, receiving of nothing, but communicating all things to the creature, and ſo being the author and fountain of all good, theſe are as pregnant proofes of a deity and godhead as any, and given by the Apoſtle, Acts 17.25. And theſe alſo are beyond the common thoughts of man; for if Iſrael, who had the clear manifeſtations of God in his word, did not yet know that God gave her corne, and wine, and oyle, but that they came from her lovers; Hoſ, 2.5, 7, 8. how much more may it be beyond the common thoughts of the heathen; that their fruitful ſeaſons come from God, rather then from their idols, and ſo to be more obfirmed in their idolatry? So that it doth not appear that it is not the Godhead, becauſe it is out of the way of mens common thoughts.

2. He ſaith, It was particularly the good affection which he beareth to men in Chriſt Jeſus, his inclinations to peace upon repentance. But what one expreſſion in all that Text that neceſſarily inferreth this? Let p. 40him ſhew it, and I have done; he uſeth indeed two reaſons to prove it.

His firſt reaſon is, becauſe ſuch witneſſes are onelyonly proper to teſtifie grace and love, and the deſire of the good of thoſe to whom they are given, in him that giveth them. But

1. Will not his underſtanding ſerve him to ſee them as pregnant teſtimonies of his deity, and the Godhead? doe not raine and fruitfull ſeaſons, and works of providence as clearly hold forth the eternal power and wiſedome of God as any other thing? Let him conſult with Job 38.25, 26. Where God expoſtulateth with Job about thoſe parcels of the creation and providence, and preſſeth both, as arguments both of his power and of his wiſedome, in the water courſes of heavens, in cauſing it to raine, and by it the tender bud to bring forth; in that he was a father to the rain, & begot the drops of dew; and found a womb of the ice, and bindeth the influences of the Pleiades, and guides Arcturus with his ſons, and hath ſo ſet the ordinances of heaven in their conſtant courſe: is there not both power and wiſedome ſeen in that circular providence? Hoſ. 2 laſt. I wil heare the heavens, and they ſhal heare the earth, &c. Let him conſider the Prophet Jeremiah, cap. 14. v. 22. where he ſaith, are there any of the vanities of the nations that can give raine? Art not thou he? therefore we wil wait upon thee. What will Mr. Goodwin ſay to this? are not ſhowres and raine fit and proper teſtimonies of Gods power, and of his deity, and ſo pertinent to call them off from idols to the living God? Why doth he reaſſume that impious licence to charge the Scriptures, and holy pen-men thereof, with impertinent and improper evidences? they frequently produce raine, ſhowres and fruitfull ſeaſons, as evidences of power and wiſedome; but Mr. Goodwin ſaith that they are not proper Teſtimonies thereof.

2. It plainely appeares they alwayes prove his power and wiſedom, but where doth he once prove that they are proper to teſtifie grace and love in Jeſus Chriſt? Let him take the wiſeman along with him, and he will tell him, that no man can know either love or hatred, ſo neither thoughts of good or hurt by theſe outward things. Eccleſ. 9.1, 2. Hee cauſeth them all to fall upon all without exception. Nay, if any difference, moſt on thoſe to whom he hath the leaſt thoughts of good in Chriſt Jeſus. Pſal. 17.14. Men of the world, whoſe belly thou filleſt with thy hidden treaſures. To uſe no more but this, thoſe who are obſtinate and incorrigible in ſin, and ſo by God are given up to a reprobate ſenſe, and by his conſequent will are for that obſtinacy deſtined to deſtruction, ſo that God now hateth them; yet do theſe, ſo long as they live upon earth, enjoy raine and fruitful ſeaſons. But will Mr. Goodwin ſay that they are proper evidences of Gods love, and deſire of their good, and inclinations to peace upon repentance? But now I am by a faire occaſion caſt upon a point of ſome concernement in the controverſie betwixt Mr. Goodwin and us; and that is, the ſufficiency in the creatures alone to bring men to believe in Chriſt. Mr. Goodwin in his conference with Mr, Simpſon was very aſſertive of this, that the heathen p. 41had ſufficient means to bring to faith in Jeſus Chriſt; but he was very unwilling to diſcover what that ſufficient means of faith is, and I blame him not; but he is ſomething more daring in this treatiſe, and affirmes that the raine and fruitful ſeaſons can diſcover the Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, and bring men to faith in him, they being proper onelyonly to teſtifie a reconcilement and attonement in Chriſt; but I find not Mr. Goodwin in one ſyllable inclining to prove it by good demonſtrative reaſon. I ſhall therefore addreſſe to accoaſt him with an Argument or two, to prove that raine and fruitful ſeaſons are no proper teſtimonies of the mercy of God in Chriſt, or an attonement and ſatisfaction made by him. Some ſhall be probable, others more coercive, and that, both ad hominem, and ad rem, and ſo I ſhall prove that this cited text containes not ſufficient means of faith in Chriſt.

Argum. 1 If the Apoſtle ſpeak as much in all reſpects elſewhere, and yet not for that end, or expecting that improvment, that men ſhould diſcover a Saviour and a Mediator, Then it is probable that in this text Act. 14. he doth not expect ſuch an improvement as to diſcover a mediator, and ſo by conſequence thoſe things here mentioned, are not fit and proper teſtimonies thereof.

But the former is true. Therefore the latter is true.

Certainely the Apoſtle would have that in his eye as the end, and expect the higheſt improvement to which thoſe meanes afforded are proper and adapted. Now let us ſee in Acts 17.24, 25, 26, 27. when Paul met with the idolatry of them at Athens, he takes occaſion to preach the ſame ſermon as to them, at Lyſtra; onelyonly the place is different, all things elſe alike; the occaſion the ſame, their idolatry; the end the ſame, to reſtraine them from it, to turne them from their vanities to the living God; the Sermon the ſame, in both he preached the power of God in the creation; in both he preached the power of God in the works of providence. Nay, in this text Act. 17.24, 25. hee goeth ſomething further in expreſſions of providence then in Acts 14. for herein he ſaith only, [he giveth raine and fruitfull ſeaſons, and filleth the hearts of men with food & gladneſſe.] But Act. 17.24, 25. ſaith, [he giveth all things;] but what is the improvement that the Apoſtle aims at, or any man can rationally expect from theſe things! The Apoſtle tells us, ["That they might ſeek the Lord, foreign.] to ſeek the Lord, and by a gr…ping after him to find him. Now Mr. Goodwin laying the prejudice of his opinion aſide, may conſider with me, 1. That the perſon that theſe are propounded to diſcover, is not Jeſus Chriſt the mediator, but the Lord God the party offended; it was not to diſcover an attonement or ſatisfaction, but a deity; not to bring men in to believe in Chriſt, or repent of their idolatry, but onelyonly to reſtraine them further perſiſtence in idolatry. 2. Conſider, that it is not clearely to ſee God, and roundly to draw out the moſt intimate concluſions concerning him, but onelyonly, foreign, levi tactu pertractare, or palpare, as it is rendred, to grope as blind men. Now if this text urge as much every way, as Act. 14.16. and yet ariſeth no p. 42higher then the groping after God in his works, as blinde men, and by it attaining ſome kind of knowledge of him to keep from worſhipping ſtocks and ſtones; then it is probable that that text Acts 14.16, 17. ſpeaketh not of ſhowres and fruitful ſeaſons as fit and proper teſtimonies to diſcover a Chriſt and a Saviour, and to enable men to draw out very roundly the ſubſtance of the Goſpel.

Argum. 2 If it be not likely that men ſhould heare of Jeſus Chriſt in the Goſpel, except ſome one or more had been ſent to preach it, then the raine and fruitfull ſeaſons are not proper teſtimonies of Jeſus Chriſt, neither do preach him.

"But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

Let not M…. Goodwin ſeek this ſubterfuge to evade the validity of the propoſition, by diſtinguiſhing betwixt the Goſpel and the ſound of the heavens; for he makes the Goſpel to carry ſuch a latitude, as that it conteineth in it the ſound of the heavens, and to heare it by the creatures, is in his ſenſe to heare it in the Goſpel, as he himſelfe affirmeth thus; [I grant the preaching of the Goſpel is the onelyonly ſufficient mean…s of faith in Chriſt;Diſpute with Mr. Simpſon. p. 65. but then I add, that raine and fruitfull ſeaſons doe preach the Goſpel.] And ſo in his own judgement to hear of Chriſt any way, is to heare of him in the Goſpel, and it is but conſonant to reaſon, becauſe the very hearing of Chriſt is Goſpel. Now upon this foundation I build my Argument; for, if this be true that men cannot heare of this Goſpel, or of Chriſt in the Goſpel, except one or more doth diſcover it and be ſent for that purpoſe; then it muſt follow that the fruitfull ſhowres and ſeaſons do not preach the Goſpel. For, theſe are not they that Mr. Goodwin would have to be ſent to preach in Rom. 10.14.Rom. 10.14Rom 10:14 But the Minor is Mr. Goodwins own, ſpeaking of that text Rom. 10.14. How ſhal they heare without a preacher? ſaith thus; [That it is not likely that any man ſhould heare of Chriſt in the Goſpel,Pagans debt. pag. 33 if ſome or more had not been ſent by God to publiſh it in the world.

Argum. 3 If that text Act. 14.16, (who ſuffered the nations to walk in their own ways) ſpeaketh thus much to us, that God did not deal with men as under the Goſpel, but onelyonly give them meanes to reſtraine them from their evil wayes; then thoſe fruitful ſeaſons did not preach Chriſt, nor doth that text enforce any ſuch thing.

"But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The propoſition is grounded upon this truth. When God diſcovers Chriſt any way, and a mediator and attonement by him, and enableth a man to draw out the moſt intimate concluſions of the Goſpel, he doth deale with them as with men under the Goſpel. And the Minor or aſſumption is Mr. Goodwins own, who in anſwer to that text Act. 14.16,Diſpute Mr. Simpſon. p. 63. ſaith thus; Although he ſuffered thoſe nations to walk in their own wayes, that is, did not deale with them as with men under the Goſpel; yet he gave them ſuch meanes as would have reſtrained them from their evil wayes had they been vigilant. How Mr. Goodwin digladiates with himſelfe ſometimes that text is produced by him to prove that God deales with men as under the Goſpel, even the heathen, and the nations whom p. 43he ſuffered to walk in their owne wayes, and that the ſhowes and fruitful ſeaſons preach Chriſt, and enable men to draw out the ſubſtance of the Goſpel; and yet other ſometimes it is produced to no other end but to grant that God dealeth not with the nations (whom he ſo ſuffers) as with men under the Goſpel, and all the meanes that he affordeth to ſuch, tends but hitherto to reſtrain them from their evil wayes, and that but upon this proviſo, if they had been diligent. Theſe do not well conſiſt together.

Argum. 4 If no man hath any ſufficient meanes originally given him of God to believe on Jeſus Chriſt, but onelyonly a remote ſufficiency, that is, ſuch in the uſe whereof they may poſſeſſe themſelves of ſufficient means, then the ſhowres and fruitful ſeaſons do not preach Chriſt, nor are ſufficient meanes of faith in Chriſt.

"But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The ſtrength of this Argument lyeth in this, for any man to have the Goſpel diſcovered any way. Chriſt preached, and life upon repentance brought to light, is means ſufficient to bring men to ſalvation. Yea, and Mr. Goodwin himſelfe affirmes,pag. …5. that God giveth faith to no man but in giving theſe meanes to beget faith, in his conference with Mr. Simpſon; and in this treatiſe of his, affirmeth, that a heathen man may quit himſelfe to ſuch a degree of wel-pleaſing to God, ſo as that he will not fayle to reveale Chriſt to him in ſome degree or other which ſhall be ſaving. Let Mr Goodwin, if here hee doe not grant that to have Chriſt revealed any way, be ſufficient meanes of believing in Chriſt, Say what is

The Minor of the Syllogiſme is Mr. Goodwins owne: in expreſſe words, he ſaith thus; I doe not meane that the Gentiles, Diſpute with Mr. Simpſon. pag. 79.or any man whatſoever, hath an immediate ſufficiency to believe in Chriſt originally given them of God, but onelyonly a remote, that is ſo much as by the uſe of it they may poſſeſſe themſelves of further means, by which they ſhal have an immediate ſufficient meanes to believe. I doe earneſtly deſire that Mr. Goodwin had ſo much divinity as to reduce himſelfe out of this labyrinth into which he hath improvidently brought himſelfe; for if no heathen man hath only more then a remote ſufficiency to believe, which he affirmes in one Treatiſe; And that remote ſufficiency to ariſe no higher then ſo much, upon the uſe whereof they ſhould not fayle of having Chriſt revealed ſome way or other, which he affirmeth in another Treatiſe; then how can this be near the truth, that every heathen man hath ſuch a cleare diſcovery of Chriſt, and ſatisfaction by him by the creatures and fruitful ſhowres and ſeaſons, as is a ſufficient meanes to bring them to faith? which is the ſubject of this his Treatiſe. His immediate ſufficiency implyeth the diſcovery of Chriſt, his mediate or remote ſufficiency excludes it as actually done; yet both he contendeth for to be the inheritance of every heathen man. Is not Mr. Goodwin a fit man to have his mouth opened againſt his brethren, for ſpeaking at ſuch a rate of contradictions and inconſiſtences as hee doth in his diſpute with Mr. Simpſon, in the cloſe of it? Firſt let him take the beame out of his owne p. 44eye, and conſider whether that aſſertion which denies any revelation of Chriſt to the heathen in any kind or degree, until they uſe well that which is originally given them of God. And that aſſertion which affirms, That every heathen man in that which is originally given to him, may with out any further improvement diſcover Chriſt, and draw out the ſumme of the Goſpel, Bee not contradictions at a ſufficient rate.

Argum. 5 If the Gentiles, til ſuch time as the partition wal was broken downe, were without Chriſt, aliens from the promiſes, and without hope; then the rayne and fruitful ſeaſons did not preach Chriſt and life upon repentance, neither were they fit or ſufficient meanes of faith in Chriſt.

But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The force of this Argument lyeth in this, To have the goſpel preached, and life upon repentance diſcovered, and ſo, as men are enabled to draw out the moſt intimate concluſions and ſum of the goſpel, it cannot be rationally concluded that ſuch are without Chriſt, and without promiſe, and without hope: to be without Chriſt is, as interpreters give it us, (aaSine Chriſto, i. e. ſine cognitione, lege, gratia, vita Chriſti. Cornel. à Lapid in loc.) to be without the knowledge, law, grace, life of Chriſt. How thoſe that have the goſpel preached, can be ſayd to be without Chriſt, and thoſe that by the ſhowres and fruitful ſeaſons, and the ſound of the heavens have the words of eternal life, can be ſaid to be without the promiſes; and thoſe that by theſe forenamed means are enabled to draw out the ſumme of the goſpel, and to diſcover life upon repentance, can be ſayd to be without hope, I ſhall be an expectant of ſome of Mr. Goodwins reaſon to unfold. It is not the evaſion of Corvinus that will ſerve his turne, who being by his adverſary preſt with this Text, expounds it thus; (bbGentes fuerunt ſine Chriſto, quia Chriſtum ſibi non ſperabant; & ſpem non habuiſſe dicuntur, quia non ſperaverunt in promiſſiones Judris factas. Corvin. in Mol. cap. 39. §. 4.) The nations were without Chriſt, in that they did not hope in Chriſt; and they were without hope, in that they did not hope in thoſe promiſes that were made to the Jews: but this comes farre ſhort of ſatisfaction. For firſt, theſe words, in that they did not hope in Chriſt for themſelves, are no rational interpretation of his phraſe, being without Chriſt. For their being without Chriſt, did diſtinguiſh the Gentiles from the Jewes; but it was not the want of the act of hope in Chriſt that diſtinguiſhed the gentiles from the Jews; becauſe in this they were alike: many among the Jews did not actually hope in Chriſt, which was the cauſe of their final rejection, but that which differenced them was their being (ſine fundamento ſpei) without the foundation of hope, that is, the diſcovery of Chriſt in the promiſes, And this will be more evident, if we conſider what it was that made them one, and tooke away this difference betwixt the Jew and the Gentile; not the hope of the Gentiles in the promiſes that were peculiar to the Jewes, this was not pertinent to them as Gentiles, but as Proſelites; but their hope in the promiſes made to themſelves, as appeares in the 13. and 17. verſes, where the Apoſtle affirms that thoſe that were a farre off are made nigh, yea, and made one with them▪ but that was by having the goſpel preached to them that were a farre off, as to them that were nigh. Now if their p. 45oneneſſe with the Jew lay in this, that they had the ſame promiſes of Chriſt in the goſpel, and ſo the ſame foundation of hope, (ſame, ſpecifically, I mean, not numerically) it will follow that their difference lay in this, that the Jewes had the foundation of hope in the promiſes, but the Gentiles none, ſo without Chriſt and without hope: without Chriſt, becauſe without the knowledge of Chriſt; without hope, becauſe without the foundation and ground of hope. But how can thoſe that have Chriſt preached, and life upon repentance, and the ſumme of the goſpel diſcovered, any ways be ſayd in this ſenſe to be either without Chriſt, or without hope? Neither ſecondly, is this enough to render them in general without hope, becauſe they did not hope in the promiſes made to the Jewes. What if they did not? yet if they had diſcoveryes of Chriſt and life upon repentance, and the ſumme of the Goſpel preached ſome other way, eſpecially in a ſaving way, it is enough to beſpeak them not without hope; which untill I receive further ſatisfaction, muſt prevaile with me to think that the heathen have not ſuch diſcoveries by the fruitful ſeaſons, becauſe they are ſaid to be without hope.

Argum. 5 If the word of faith, and the doctrine of Chriſt crucified, and the ſumme and effect of the goſpel be to the Greeks fooliſhneſſe; then a natural man cannot by the help of the raine and fruitful ſeaſons ariſe to any ſuch rational diſcourſe as to draw the intimate concluſions of the goſpel thence.

But the former is true, therefore the latter is true alſo.

The propoſition of this Syllogiſme I conceive is beyond Mr. Goodwins ſcruple, becauſe the ſame thing, in reſpect of the ſame perſon and time cannot be both a rational diſcourſe, and yet fooliſhneſſe; cannot be clearely ſeene, and yet not ſeen at all. F…r ſo the Criticks in that language obſerve foreign, from foreign, both foreign, à non videndo, quaſi non omnino viſum.

The minor I conceive is beyond his ſcruple, from the Apoſtles expreſſe, 1 Cor. 1.23.1 Cor. 1.231 Cor 1:23 we preach Chriſt crucified to the Jewes a ſtumbling block, and to the Greekes fooliſhneſſe; and thus it is till they come to be called by the ſanctifying and enlightning ſpirit of God. I might levy up more Scriptures as diſtinct arguments, but I ſhall refer them hither, which I entreate Mr. Goodwins thoughts upon, as 1 Cor. 2.6, 7, 8.1 Cor. 2, 6, 7, 8.1 Cor 2:61 Cor 2:71 Cor 2:8 wherein the Apoſtle preached the ſumme of the goſpel to them, he ſayd, he did not preach the wiſedome of the world, but the wiſedome of God in a myſtery, the hidden wiſedome of God, which none of the Princes of the world knew. Now I hope that (whatever it be) that is ſeen and diſcovered by the light of nature, and by every one that hath but reaſon and underſtanding, (as Mr. Goodwin ſaith, that the ſum of the goſpel and Chriſt is) cannot extend it ſelfe far beyond the wiſdom of this world, nay it is the very ſame. And how that Chriſt, or that goſpel that is made manifeſt by the rain and fruitful ſeaſons to every heathen man, can be truly called the hidden wiſdom of God, yea, to be hidden from Ages and Generations, Col, 1.26. I ſee nor,Col. 1.26.Col 1:26 Theſe and infinite p. 46more, do ex diametro oppoſe Mr. Goodwins fond gloſſe upon this text, Act. 14.16.

Argum. 7 If every heathen man by the raine and fruitful ſeaſons, and workes of providence have a ſufficient meanes of believing in Chriſt, and to ſalvation. Then all the Evangelical diſpenſations in the oral preaching of the goſpel by his Son, is no way requiſite to faith and ſalvation.

But his latter is impious and abſurd, therefore the former is ſo alſo.

The propoſition of this Syllogiſme is thus grounded, upon the true import of the tearme ſufficiency, which conteineth in it all requiſites to that thing, in reference to which there is a ſufficiency. As to inſtance; here is no ſufficiency to faith, except all requiſites to faith be preſent; ſo to Salvation it ſelfe, and this the Remonſtrants upon the p…inciples of reaſon roundly give us; for ſpeaking of ſufficient means to converſion;Acta Synod. Art. 4^o pag. 91 they ſay thus; Sufficiens gratia nihil aliud eſt quam ea gratia qua ad converſionem efficiendam ita adhibet quae ſunt neceſſaria, ut quod ad actus praeſtationem neceſſarium nihil ultra requiratur. Gratia ſufficiens adhibet omnia neceſſaria; tolle aliquid quod neceſſarium ſit, et non erit gratia ſufficiens. Wherein they grant that nothing can be called ſufficient in any reſpect, but that which puts forth all requiſites and neceſſaries; then it muſt follow, that if the raine and fruitfull ſeaſons be ſufficient meanes for faith, there needs no more. And therefore the Scriptures are not to come under the notion of requiſites to faith and ſalvation, and ſo by conſequence to be uſeleſſe to thoſe ends and purpoſes. The Scriptures and all Evangelical diſpenſations tend but hitherto to make men wiſe to ſalvation, and to be but ſufficient means to lead men to faith in Jeſus Chriſt, and by that to Salvation. But what need any thing to this purpoſe, ſeeing every heathen man hath ſufficient meanes of believing, and ſo of being ſaved, even by the raine and fruitful ſeaſons; and ſtand in no need of the Scriptures to make him wiſe to ſalvation, becauſe the ſound of the heavens, are the words of eternal life, as well as thoſe that Chriſt ſpake, and are ſufficient to beget faith in us, and ſo to ſave us? But how would this overturn the whole ſeries of goſpel diſcoveries, and cal the wiſdom of the Almighty to the teſt of humane preſumption? What will Mr. Goodwin ſay to that of the Apoſtle,1 Cor. 1.211 Cor 1:21 1 Cor. 1.21. After that the world by wiſedome knew not God, it pleaſed God by the fooliſhneſſe of preaching to ſave them that believe? Why was all this waſte? why did God uſe this method and way of fooliſh preaching? was there no need of it? Let us heare the Apoſtle ſpeak, The world by wiſedome knew not God. verſe 20. Chriſt crucified to the Greeks was fooliſhneſſe. v. 23. It was the hidden wiſedome of God, which none of the Princes of this world ever knew. cap. 2 v 7, 8. Such words as mans wiſedome never teacheth. v. 13 Such things as the natural man cannot receive, therefore by the fooliſhneſſe of preaching he ſaveth them that believe. Let not Mr. Goodwin then ſay that the raine and fruitful ſeaſons are ſufficient p. 47meanes of faith in Jeſus, leaſt he at unawares beſpeak this ordinance of preaching fooliſhneſſe indeed. But Mr. Goodwin (I feare) hath given much occaſion to the world to think, that he eſteems it but a light thing to proſtitute the authority, neceſſity, weight of the holy Scriptures to the credit of his own opinion.

Argum. 8 Thoſe things that have no cognation or kinred with, or relation at all to a Saviour and Mediator, cannot by their owne natural import diſcover Chriſt, or life upon repentance.

But the raine and fruitful ſeaſons have no natural kinred to Chriſt as Mediator, or any relation to him.

Therefore they cannot by their natural import preach Chriſt, or be ſufficient meanes of faith in Chriſt.

The propoſition of this argument is thus ſtrengthned; there is nothing can naturally and rationally diſcover any thing that is not naturally and rationally contained in it, that by a rational reſolution of cauſes and effects into their natural principles, we may be led by the one to the other in a rational proceſſe.

But there is no ſuch natural relation or kindred betwixt the raine and fruitful ſeaſons and Chriſt. Thus I prove it.

Thoſe things that in a courſe of providence had their ends and uſes, and were to have their beings, although Adam had never ſinned, and ſo there had been no place for ſuch a perſon as Chriſt; have no natural relation to Chriſt, neither can naturally import him.

But the former is true of rain and fruitful ſeaſons.

Therefore the latter is true of them alſo.

Adam was ſet to till the ground, and after the firſt creation,Gen. 2.5Gen 2:5 the fruits of the earth were to be propagated by the help of the influences of heaven as well as mans induſtry, as appeareth by the text; A miſt went up from the earth to water the face of the ground. Gen. 2.6. True it is, they are continued to us by vertue of the merits of Chriſt, but this is not natural and from their firſt original. Fruitful ſeaſons are not peculiar to man as fallen, nor yet to man reſtored; but were alſo in common with Adam ſtanding: Now I demand whether rain or fruitful ſeaſons had diſcovered ſuch a perſon as Chriſt? Such a work as ſatisfaction, life upon ſuch a condition as repentance, in his integrity, in which condition I know Mr. Goodwin will ſay, he was not capable either of the work or diſcovery of a Mediatour. If they did not, then, I demand what alteration is there in their faces now? or how can men make a rational deduction of Chriſt from them now, more then in his integrity? I ſay, by their own natural import, without the help of further meanes to acquaint us with all the tranſactions betwixt God and fallen man.

Thus I have by a few arguments labour'd to prove that raine & fruitful ſeaſons do not, cannot preach Chriſt, diſcover life upon repentance; and by theſe I conceive I have refelled his firſt reaſon wherby he would prove that the Apoſtle in Acts 14.16. affirmes that God by thoſe fruitful ſeaſons did not leave himſelfe without witneſſe of his good p. 48affection in Jeſus Chriſt to the world. His reaſon is, becauſe ſuch things as ſhowres and fruitful ſeaſons are fit and proper onelyonly to teſtifie Chriſt and mercy in him.

His ſecond reaſon by which he would prove that the raine and fruitful ſeaſons Act. 14.16 preach Chriſt and the goſpel, and the good will of God to men in Chriſt Jeſus, is this as followeth:

[The Apoſtle being to preach the goſpel unto the Gentiles, preached no other doctrine to them at Lyſtra but this; we cannot think that hee preached only metaphyſical and philoſophical ſermons concerning the eſſence and properties of God, but that which was evangelical and ſavouring of the goſpel. Now the holy Ghoſt reporteth nothing evangelical, if this be not.] But this reaſon diſcovers as much of Mr. Goodwin as any that went before, For,

1. Take notice how he doth ſecretly aſperſe the Theological and divine Sermons of the Apoſtle, concerning the eſſence, and properties, and providence of God, with the detracting titles of metaphyſical and philoſophical Sermons. Will not Mr. Goodwins knowledge ſerve him to diſcerne a difference betwixt Theology and Philoſophy? God being ſupra omnes Ens, and extra omne praedicamentum, above all Entities, and without all praedicaments. The diſcourſes of his nature, eſſence, and properties, are very weakly and abſurdly called metaphyſical, which conſiders ens, quatenus ens, for its object; Metaphiſicks conſider God no otherwiſe then it conſiders all other beings, as unum, bonum & verum, that is, as having onelyonly an entitive unity, goodneſſe and truth: but to conſider God as a Creatour and Preſerver; as the fountaine of all good, theſe are above metaphyſical notions and Sermons. Hence it is a rule, Metaphyſica parit ſcientiam tantum, ſed Theologia fidem, that is, Metaphyſicks beget a knowledge onelyonly, but Theology or Divinity begetteth faith. I would adviſe Mr. Goodwin to retract theſe notions, leſt his Church, who are much led by an implicite faith, ſhould think that the divine diſcoveries of Gods nature, and properties, and providence, comes under the notion of vaine philoſophy.

2. Suppoſe they were metaphyſical Sermons truly ſo called, yet in the next place Mr. Goodwin ſuppoſeth that the Apoſtle muſt not preach ſuch, he being to preach the Goſpel at Lyſtra; as if the preaching of the goſpel, and the precahing of the nature, eſſence, and proprieties of God, were not conſiſtent: But upon what colour of reaſon, I pray you? may not ſuch diſcoveries diſpoſe and prepare them to receive the moſt intimate concluſions of the goſpel? Nay, are not ſuch diſcoveries neceſſary to this believing in Chriſt? and are not ſuch preparations and diſpoſitions to receive the goſpel, the foundation of this doctrine of univerſal grace, which the Remonſtrants ſo much contend for? True indeed, had the Apoſtle come to preach the goſpel to the Jewes, who were well inſtructed in the knowledge of the true God, there had been no ſuch neceſſity; but coming to the Gentiles, who were generally lead away to dumb idols, as the Apoſtle teſtifieth, and did not know the true God; it is now requiſite that he begin here to make them to know p. 49him. For the ſaving knowledge of Jeſus Chriſt doth ſuppoſe a prevening knowledge of the true God, as in Jo. 17.3.John 17.3John 17:3 it is life eternal to know thee the only true God, and Jeſus Chriſt whom thou haſt ſent. And in that text ſo much uſed in vaine by Mr. Goodwin, Heb. 11.6.Heb. 11.6Heb 11:6 he that cometh to God muſt firſt believe that God is. But let Mr. Goodwin conſider, whether thoſe diſcourſes which treat of the nature, eſſence, and properties of God, be not pertinent notions to make men believe that God is; and that is no more then we muſt conclude, if our underſtandings doe but goe hand in hand with the Scriptures: for to believe in Chriſt, is no more then to believe that God is reconciled to us in Chriſt, Gods juſtice ſatisfied in Chriſt, and that God will bleſſe us with all ſpiritual bleſſings in Chriſt, which naturally importeth that there is a God, who is reconciled, whoſe juſtice is ſatisfied, who was offended, and who is a rewarder of them that ſeek him. Hence Divines will tell him, that Chriſt is but objectum mediatum et ſecundarium fidei, Ameſ. med. Theol. pag. 7.the mediate and ſecundary object of ſaving faith, and God himſelfe the primary object of faith, as the Apoſtle telleth us, 1 Pet. 1.21. we believe by him, in God that rayſed him from the dead. 2 Cor. 3.4. This truſt have wee in God through Chriſt; ſo that it appeares to me in vaine to preach Chriſt by whom attonement is made, before we teach the true God, who is offended, and therefore ſtand in need of having an attonement made; and alſo, that theſe ſermons of the nature, properties, and eſſence of God are neceſſary to the diſcoverie of Chriſt, and may reductively and diſpoſitive be called the preaching of the goſpel. Why then ſhould Mr. Goodwin thus weakly argue, that the Apoſtle did not preach the properties and eſſence of God, becauſe his task was to preach the goſpel? The Argument would avail è contra.

3. Suppoſe I grant him theſe, yet he will be found too light in the ballance, for he ſaith, that this muſt needs be goſpel, becauſe if this be not goſpel, he is not found to preach the goſpel at all at Lyſtra, the holy Ghoſt doth not diſcover to us any other goſpel preach't at Lyſtra. I know not how to blemiſh his underſtanding ſo much, as to ſay he cannot diſcover ſo much in the text as may confute him; neither would I be cenſorious as to judge him too too willing to deceive both himſelfe and his reader: but I leave it to the world to judge. He cannot but know there were many intervening degrees betwixt theſe words of the Apoſtle, and the goſpel which he preached at Lyſtra. Theſe words in controverſie were ſpoken upon the occaſion of the peoples idolatry; this idolatry was upon the occaſion of Apoſtles healing the criple: and this miracle was occaſioned by the Apoſtles ſeeing that the criple had faith to be healed, and that faith was wrought by the goſpel which the Apoſtle preached, as the text expreſſely ſaith, verſe 7. by which he converted ſome to the faith, although others were yet given to idolatry. Now put the caſe that the words in queſtion be not the goſpel; yet may we preſume to ſay that they preached the goſpel at Lyſtra, becauſe the holy Ghoſt ſaith that they did preach the goſpel there, and therefore that which he produceth as a reaſon, ſeemes to be of the ſame validity with p. 50all the reſt, which is this; the Apoſtles preached no other goſpel, becauſe it is not recorded. And may we not ſay by the ſame rule in ver. 20.21. that Paul preached no goſpel at Derbe, becauſe what Paul preached there, is not recorded? and would not this reaſoning help us to give the holy Ghoſt the lye? who ſaith in both, that they preached the goſpel both at Dorbe, and at Lyſtra. By this time any rational man may ſee what is become of Mr. Goodwins double doubtleſſe, and I cannot but profeſſe it a tedious task to be tyed to trace him through all his extravagances, and impertinent allegations. And it is ſtrange to me that he that undertakes to produce ſuch arguments that neither men on earth, nor angels in heaven, can anſwer, as he ſaith of himſelf in his diſpute with Mr. Simpſon, I need not cite the page, it is ſo notorious: that he (I ſay) ſhould thus delitate in a matter of ſo great concernement, and that not one allegation, nor any particular in any Allegation ſhould have the leaſt concluſive validity in it, Certainely muſt produce ſome more weighty reaſons to prove that the raine and fruitfull ſeaſons are fit teſtimonies of a Saviour and attonement by him, and the ſumme of the Goſpel, otherwiſe he is not of that credit with me as to take his bare word for it, and he hath no reaſon to faſten any blame upon us for not believing his aſſertions herein, becauſe wee finde him declining his own heights very much; for after all theſe his impertinent notions we find him giving the ſum of all that went before in this impertinent concluſion, thus; ſo that it is cleare from this Scripture, that all the world, even thoſe that are moſt ſtraitned and ſcanted in this kind, thoſe that have not the letter of the goſpel, have yet the ſufficient meanes of believing, 1. That God is. 2. That he is a rewarder of all that ſeek him, Heb. 11.6. which the Apoſtle makes to be all the faith abſolutely neceſſary to bring us into favour with him. How is he ſuddenly ſunk into a degenerous concluſion, that do …not at all ſuit with his intended purpoſe, which was to prove that all heathen men are ſufficiently enabled to believe in Chriſt, and to draw out the ſum and ſubſtance of the goſpel? and he proves it by a text which he ſaith proves no more, then that men may believe, Firſt, that God is. Secondly, that he is a rewarder of them that ſeek him. Is not Mr. Goodwin able to ſee a wide diſtance betwixt theſe two, to believe on Chriſt, and to believe that God is? Although every one that believes in Chriſt muſt believe in God, yet it followeth not è contra, that all thoſe that believe that God is,Secundum et primò ſuccedaneū praeceptum eſt fidei in Chriſtum non generalis illius fideiqae ante ipſum oenitentiae actum, et quamlibet legalem obedientiam praerequiritur, quâ credimus Deum eſſe, et praem…is cultoribus ſuis largiri, ſed ſpecialis fidei in Chriſtum. Epiſcop. Diſp. 24. Theſ. 1. doe believe in Jeſus Chriſt.

Adam in his integrity did believe that God was, and that he was a rewarder of them that ſeek him; but I hope Mr. Goodwin will ſay, that to believe in Jeſus Chriſt is no act proper and ſuitable for the condition of Adams integrity, therefore he had neither a ſufficiency, nor yet an obligation to believe, Again, the Jewes under the old Teſtament did believe that God was, and that he was a rewarder of all them that ſeek him, as is expreſſed Heb. 11.6. But Mr. Goodwin himſelfe contends for this, that they did not believe expreſſely in Chriſt, and it is a p. 51pillar of the Arminian doctrine, that faith in Jeſus Chriſt was neither obſerved nor yet commanded. To believe that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that ſeek him, is a general faith that is requiſite to every legal obedience, even there where Chriſt hath no place or conſideration, as Epiſcopius one of the prolocutors of his ſide clearely ſpeaketh. Nay, yet further, let Mr. Goodwin conſider whether the devils in hell doe not believe that God is, and that he is a rewarder as well of them that ſeek him, as of them that diſobey him; but theſe are neither in a ſufficiency or obligation, nor yet in a capacity of believing in Chriſt; the faith of the former comes far ſhort of the faith in the latter. Although Mr. Goodwin is pleaſed to ſay in a ſecond place, thus; Which the Apoſtle makes to be all the faith abſolutely neceſſary to bring men into favour with him. But what ground in the text doth hee diſcerne for this his aſſertion? the text ſaith indeed that without faith it is impoſſible to pleaſe God; and Mr. Goodwin himſelfe, that an evangelical faith is faith in Chriſt; and the text further ſaith, that he that cometh to God, muſt firſt believe that God is; but it doth not ſay that believing that God is, is all that is neceſſary to believing in Chriſt, or bringing men into favour with him; he that ſaith, he that aſcendeth to the top of the ladder muſt climbe up the firſt ſtep, doth not ſay, that to climbe up the firſt ſtep is ſufficient, and onelyonly neceſſary to the reaching to the top of the ladder. It may helpe to illuſtrate the caſe in hand.

And if Mr. Goodwin will have no more as probable from this text in Acts 14.16. then this, that the raine and fruitful ſeaſons are meanes ſufficient of knowing and believing that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that ſeek him, he ſhal quietly reſt with his deſire, although it be a non probatum. But then I muſt admoniſh him, that if no more can be forced from this text, not to put any more the word of God upon the rack to ſtretch it to his owne heights, to make it ſpeak thus much, that raine and fruitfull ſeaſons are ſufficient meanes to bring men to faith in Jeſus Chriſt, and to draw out the ſumme of the goſpel. And how impertinent this text is to prove his aſſertion, let all the world judge, ſeeing it doth not ariſe ſo high as faith in Jeſus Chriſt, or the ſumme of the goſpel, but onelyonly thus far by his owne confeſſion, that God is, &c.

The third text by which he proveth his aſſertion, is from Rom. 2.4.Rom. 2.4.Rom 2:4 Not knowing that the patience of God leadeth thee to repentance, which he urgeth thus; that the patience of God leadeth thee to repentance, becauſe it doth by way of a rational progreſſe, and cleare interpretation diſcover a readineſſe to receive ſuch unto grace and favour who repent unfeinedly. The evidence of which reaſon looks upon us with the ſame face of diſſatisfaction with all that went before. Suppoſe I grant all; yet how will Mr. Goodwin prove that it is either called patience and longſuffering, however knowne by that name, without the advantage of the written word, wherein are contained admonitions to repent, and ſo ſayd to lead to repentance? and this he muſt prove before he ſhall carry the cauſe by the force of this text To decide this difficulty, let us conſider, firſt, the ſcope of the Apoſtle in the former part of this Epiſtle, viz. p. 52to conclude both Jew and Gentile under him; the Gentiles he doth in the firſt chapter,Reprehendit Iudaeos, quòd ex lege ſibi datum Gentiles quaſi peccatores condemnabant, et ipſi eadem patratent. Cornel. à lapid in loc. the Jewes in this ſecond chapter; and that the ſecond chapter relateth to the Jewes, Interpreters generally conclude, as Cornelius à lapide ſaith, [He reprehends the Jews, becauſe by their law they would condemne the Gentiles as ſinners, when they conmitted the ſame things.] But that the patience of God afforded to the Jew was without the word, I think Mr. Goodwin will not affirme, which is the cauſe why the Apoſtle concludes the Jew under a greater inexcuſability, becauſe the miniſtry of the word ſuperadded to the light of nature became not efficacious to reſtraine them from ſin: and from this very argument he argues againſt the Jew, verſe 17, 18. ſtill ſuppoſing that thoſe perſons enjoying the patience of God, had the Jetter of the goſpel; which induceth me to think that the letter of the goſpel is one ingredient into this patience that thus leades to repentance.

2 I intreate Mr. Goodwin to examine whether or no in Scripture this terme patience, and forbearance, and hard and impenitent heart, and treaſuring up wrath, doe not imply the letter of the Goſpel enjoyed, and abuſed, wherein God calls, inviteth, perſwadeth, admoniſheth, wayteth to be gracious, hearkeneth and heareth if men will turne; and thus men continuing obſtinate, God is patient, longſuffering, and men are guilty of hard and impenitent hearts, and treaſure up for themſelves wrath againſt the day of wrath. To give a taſte of theſe various expreſſions Firſt, for the terme longſuffering, we find it in 1 Pet. 3.20. The longſuffering of God waited upon the old world: but we read not of this till the preaching of Noah, that preacher of righteouſneſſe So alſo 2 Pet. 3.9. The Lord is longſuffering, which in its very notion implyeth a word, and the letter of the goſpel, as appeares by the words which follow; not willing that any ſhould periſh, but come to the knowledge of the truth. Let him conſult Beza in his Annotations, who ſaith thus; aaforeign ducit evangelio, ſcil. ipſis prophanis, tunc demum parelacto et Iudaeis exhib to, quo reſpicit particula foreign …bſque Chriſti verbo benignitas dei po…ſt producere homi nes ad peccati ſē ſū, non ad veram reſcipiſcentiam. Beza annot. in loc.[That leadeth, that is by the goſpel, at length diſcovered to the Jews, and to thoſe prophane Gentiles: without the word, the benignity of God may lead to the ſenſe of ſin, but not to the true repentance for ſin.] Let him conſult with Arminius, and he will tel him thus; [bbPraedeſtinatio non eſt ex bonicate ſimpliciter confiderata, ſed ex modo miſerio cordiae, et gratiae, et patientiae, & longanimitatis, ex eadem bonitate prodeunt…s erga aliquamdiu reluctantes, et vocationi ſtutim non parentes, ad ſuſtin…ndam moram converſionis. Armin. antiperk. pag. 16. Predeſtination is not from goodneſſe ſimply conſidered, but from mercy, and grace in Chriſt, and patience and longſuffering iſſuing out of that goodneſſe towards thoſe that draw back, and doe not preſently obey their call, that ſo he might beare with their delay of converſion.] Wherein he clearely giveth us, that patience and longſuffering have no place until men have the call of God to repentance, and men deny and reſiſt, and ſo God ſuſtaine and beare the delay of converſion. So likewiſe for the term of a hard and impenitent heart, and treaſuring up wrath. Let Mr. Goodwin ſhew me, if he can, where they are uſed, & do not clearly intimate the letter of the goſpel enjoyed and abuſed. A heart that cannot repent, God never layeth it to the charge of any man until he hath uſed all means to bring men to repentance, which he is never ſaid to do until he give them his word to admoniſh them to repent. It is true indeed, they may be non punjtentes, but not impoenitentes, that is negative, but not p. 53privative impenitents. Men are not ſaid to be incapable of being renewed by repentance before they have had a taſte of the good word of God, Heb. 6.5, 6. And true it is, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven againſt all unrighteouſneſſe; and they that ſin without law, ſhall periſh without law; but to treaſure up wrath, to be veſſels of wrath fitted for deſtruction in whom wrath is treaſured up, which is all one with the finding the day of judgment more intollerable then Sodom, I know the Remonſtrants themſelves wil not admit without the word. All the works either of the common or extraordinary providence cannot draw men to repentance, if we may believe the joynt ſuffrage of the Remonſtrants themſelves, who ſay thus;ccQuomodo fieri poſſe ut reſcipiſcerent aut reſcipuiſſent ſi virtutes et virtutes tantum conſiderantur: virtutes qud t…les reſcipiſcentiam non ſuadent: verum aliquod neceſſe eſt quo reſcipiſcentia mandetur aut ſuadeatur ſaltem, nam ſine verbo ne fictam quiſdem re… ipiſcentiam. cificere poſſent virtutes. Scrip. Synod. Art. 4^o. p. 125. How can it be that they ſhould repent, or be ſaid to have repented? if miracles be conſidered only as miracles without the word, miracles cannot perſwade to repentance; it is neceſſary that the word be added, by which repentance is commanded, or at leaſt men invited to it, for without the word men cannot put forth ſo much as a feigned repentance. And the judgement of the beſt of his own ſide will bee a good argument againſt him; for if miracles and the works of extraordinary providence cannot lead to repentance without the word, how then can the works of common providence do it without the word? Now if this text and all the expreſſes in it do import a mixture of the word with all the lenity and forbearance of God, then any man may ſee how impertinently it is produced as a proof for his aſſertion, which is, that the heathen are bound to repent and believe in Chriſt, even thoſe that never had the word or letter of the goſpel. And thus we have taken a ſurvey of his clear Scriptures, which he ſaith he hath well examined, and alſo of the concluſive validity of them for his purpoſe. Having diſcovered all his ſtrength in divine teſtimonies, he makes a tranſiſion to humane, pretending to the world, he hath both God & man on his ſide, but as he doth with the one; ſo he doth with the other, abuſeth them both ſufficiently. As he produceth a threefold divine, ſo he produceth a threefold humane teſtimony in the fourteenth page of this book, the one is out of Calvin, the ſecond out of Muſculus, the third out of the Britiſh divines in the Synod of Dort: but by what colour he calleth them to the favour of this cauſe, I am not able to divine: the dint of their teſtimony lyeth in this, that he calleth on all men to repent and believe in Chriſt without exception. B…t had he either diſcovered or conſidered what call they mean, I perſwade my ſelfe he would have waved their teſtimony. He would make us believe that they affirm that God calls all to repentance by ſuch a call as is without the letter of the goſpel: otherwiſe what is their teſtimony to his cauſe? But in ſo doing he is guilty of manifeſt ſubornation, for as for Calvin, he witneſſeth no ſuch thing, and that I cleare thus;

1. He is ſo far from teſtifying to Mr Goodwins aſſertion, that he ſaith that no man is ſufficiently enabled to the knowledge of the Creatour without the familiar ducture of the Scriptures; it is the adequate ſubject of the ſixt chapter of the firſt book of his Inſtitutions; and if he ſay that man cannot come to the ſaving knowledge of his creator without the help of the written word, we cannot rationally conceive that he whom Mr, Goodwin calleth one of the beſt of the Proteſtant Divines, p. 54ſhould alſo ſay, that a heathen man can come to the knowledge of his redeemer without the help of the written word; or if he doe, his teſtimony doth not agree with it ſelfe, and ſo I ſhall lay it aſide as not to bee taken in ſo weighty a cauſe.

2. A ſecond reaſon is this, becauſe I find him ſometimes treating of that call whereby he ſaith God calls all without exception; but in a ſenſe far different from Mr. Goodwins dreames; for in his diſcourſe upon that text, Many called, but few choſen he ſaith thu…; Nothing is ambiguous if we hold that there is a double kind of calling, Nihil erit ambiguum ſi teneamus duplicem eſſe vocationis ſpeciem; un verſalis una, quâ …mnes pariter ad ſe invitat deus perexternam verbi praedicationem, et am quibus eam in mortis odo em proponit. Ca…v. inſtitut. lib. 3^o. c. 24. § 8there is an univerſal call by which he calleth all alike to him in the external preaching of his word, even them to whom it becomes the ſavour of death, and the matter of more ſevere condemnation. Now this is clearely Calvins meaning in his general cal, ſo much relyed upon by Mr. Goodwin, viz. by the expreſs preaching of the goſpel orally; n…t at all any ſuch univerſal cal by the creatures, without the letter of the Goſpel: and until he can produce one place in all the workes of Calvin, wherein he mentioneth any other call to Jeſus Chriſt then by the letter of the goſpel, he muſt with me lye under the cenſure of a wil…ull and ſhameleſſe pervertour of mens words for his owne purpoſe: and if he thus meane by his general call, then what ſtrength this teſtimony contributeth to Mr. Goodwins cauſe, let any judg, who holds that all have a ſufficiency for faith in Chriſt without the letter of the goſpel. And at the ſame rate runneth the teſtimony of Muſculus. As for the ſuffrage of the Britiſh divines at the Synod of Dort, I cannot conceive that any who had his vote in the ſuffrage of that Synod about the five controverted points, can produce any pertinent teſtimony for him; my reaſon is, becauſe I find them thus ſpeaking point blank againſt him.Cap. 4^o. of converſion. Sect. 4. In man there are ſome remainders of the light of nature, whereby he retaineth ſome principles of God, &c. But ſo far is he from being enabled by this inbred light to come to the ſaving knowledge of God, and to turne himſelfe unto him, that he doth not make uſe of it in natural things. And againe, in that chapter of converſion, one of the errors concerning that article which they rej…ct is, as followeth, that man can ſo uſe the common grace, (the light of nature) that by it he may receive evangelical grace; and that God hath for his part ſhewne himſelfe ready to reveale Chriſt to all men, ſeeing he doth ſufficiently afford to every man neceſſary meanes for the making of Chriſt knowne, and for faith and repentance. Now if they reject that as an errour, which is the adequate ſubject of Mr. Goodwins aſſertion, certainely theſe are no probable or likely men to add any ſtrength to his cauſe; and I expect in his next that he produce the words and place where any of theſe men ſpeake of a faith grounded onelyonly upon the ſound of the heavens, or that the heathen are enabled by the light of nature to believe in Chriſt; or elſe to judge himſelfe whether it be not an unchriſtian courſe to force ſuch a ſenſe of mens writings contrary to the ſtreſſe and current of their judgement, that ſo he may have the more plauſible way for his cauſeleſs calumny of inconſiſtencies and contradictions; and when he hath ſo barbarouſly broken their heads, ſo childiſhly to give them a plaiſter, by anking them in the number of the beſt Proteſtant Divines, p. 55becauſe he thinks they ſpeake of his ſide.

Thus have I examined all his proofes both divine and humane, and I cannot but adjudg them far ſhort of proving his tenent; and therfore I adviſe him either to ſend out new, or to take a review of theſe in a ſecond and better examination, for they are all impertinent to the queſtion firſt propounded; ſome of them neceſſarily inferring the letter of the goſpel, the reſt not inferring at all either repentance or faith in Jeſus Chriſt, therefore no proper teſtimony for this doctrine, that all men without exception are bound to believe in Chriſt, though they never heard the letter of the goſpel And thus I have indeavoured to ſatisfie his owne deſires, and have taken the weapons out of his hands,pag. 6. by which he thus unhandſomely digladiates againſt the truth: and I ſhall conclude I have done it, until I ſee in his next how hee doth reaſſume them, or elſe ſurrender up to me this his firſt hold, to which I finde him ſomething inclined, becauſe as ſuſpecting the ſtrength of that which he hath all this while ſpoken, he retreateth to a ſecond, which hath no coherence at all with this, which I ſhal examine:

In the 15. Page of his Treatiſe we find him thus ſpeaking;

[Suppoſe we grant, for Arguments ſake, that the heathen to whom the goſpel was never orally preached, were not in an immediate capacity of believing it, in thoſe terms of believing lately expreſſed; yet this proves not but that they may be in a remote capacity of believing, ſuch a capacity I meane, which by a regular and conſcientious exerciſe of thoſe worthy abilities which God hath conferd upon them, might by the ordinary bleſſing, and by the ſtanding courſe of providence of God, in ſuch caſes, have riſen up to an immediate capacity in this kind, ſo that a heathen man who never heard of Jeſus Chriſt may yet by the effect of the law written in their heart, quit himſelfe to ſuch a degree of well pleaſing to God, that he will not fayl to reveale his ſon Chriſt to him after ſome ſuch manner and degree as will become ſaving to him as Chriſt ſaith, habenti dabitur, to him that hath ſhall be given.] He grants it onelyonly for argumentation ſake, that the heathen are not in an immediate capacity of believing; it ſeemeth then that he hath been hitherto proving that the heathen are in an immediate capacity of believing, as indeed the whole ſurface of his diſcourſe tendeth this way. I ſay, (capacity) as he here expreſſeth it, becauſe I hope he hath no piece of deceit in his eye, when he for ſufficiency puts capacity. Now M…, Goodwin hath not been alwayes of this mind, that the heathen are in an immediate capacity, or have an immediate ſufficiency of believing in Chriſt, for in his diſpute with Mr. Simpſon I find him thus,pag. 79. upon the diſtinction and application of ſufficiency mediate, and immediate. [My ſenſe is of the queſtion in hand, thus: I doe not meane that the Gentiles or any other man hath a preſent or immediate ſufficiency of meanes to believe originally given them of God, but a remote ſufficiency; that is, ſuch as by the uſe of it they may poſſeſs themſelves of further meanes by which they may be enabled to believe.] As Mr. Goodwin is a man that profeſſeth religion and earneſt contention p. 56for the truth, I am ſorry; for him, but as he is a ſcholler, and received by all as a man of eminent parts, I am aſhamed of him, that the world ſhould ſee ſuch pregnant ſymptomes of an impoſture upon him; that when he is forced to ſay that no man hath an immediate ſufficiency originally given him of God to believe, he ſhould now ſay, that he only ſuppoſeth for arguments ſake, that the heathen have not an immediate capacity of believing. Mr. Goodwin knowes well, what kind of men they are that ſtand in need of good memories, and let him make this one of his firſt retractations, and let the world know that it is not the wantonneſſe, but neceſſity of his genius, that extorts this ſuppoſition from him: for had he not this hold to fly to, there would be no more occaſion left for diſpute, the matter is ſo cleare againſt him, both by the evidence of reaſon and his own conceſſions. But to let this paſſe, I ſhall examine that which he here in the ſecond place urgeth, although it be utterly impertinent to the maine buſineſſe which he undertooke to prove; and the rather, becauſe in this he being one ſpirit with the Remonſtrants, I have the fairer plea to examine alſo that which is the faireſt plea for an univerſal ſufficient grace, as it is moſt plauſibly layd downe by the beſt of Mr. Goodwins way, and that he and the Arminians are of one opinion in this, I ſhall make appear by theſe following inſtances. The Remonſtrants in their ſolemne convention before the Synod of Dort make out univerſal grace thus;aaOmnibus hominum cordibus inſculpſit aliquā ſaicognitionem, itaque communi vocatione omnes ad ſe vocat deus, non eo quidem fine ut ſecundùm iſtius communis vocationis tenorem gratiae que generaliotis menſuram vitam inſtitueates immediatè ſerventur, ſed ut per eam diſponantur ut evangelicae praedicationis quâ ipſa ſalus offertur; & concionis de vitâ …ternâ reſcipiſcentiae, et fidei, deque Chriſti gratia, et juſtitia quâ vita aeterna per fidem obtinenda et impetrata eſt, idonei reddantur auditores. Act. Synod. art. 2. p. 327. God hath inſcribed in the hearts of all men ſome knowledge of himſelfe, &c. and ſo by this common call he calls all to himſelf, not to that end that thoſe that live according to the tenour of this common call or rule of this more general grace ſhould immediately be ſaved; but that by this call they may be diſpoſed and rendred hearers of that goſpel wherein ſalvation is offered, and that a doore may be opened to that ſermon of eternal life, wherein the doctrine of repentance, faith, and ſpiritual obedience; and the grace and righteouſneſſe of Chriſt, whereby eternal life is impetrated and to be obtained by faith. And Arminius alſo in his examen of Mr. Perkins ſaith to the ſame purpoſe thus; [ bbDum Chriſti cognitione deſtituuntur, tamen ſe Deus ſine teſtimonio non reliquit, et in illo tempore aliquam veritatem de potentia et bonitate ſua illis pati fecit, Legem quo que ment…bus inſculptam conſervverit, quibus bonis ſi rectè uſi fuiſſent, ſaltem ex conſcientia, majorem etiam gratiam ipſe etiam conceſſurus fuiſſet, Secundùm illud (habenti dabitur.) Arm. anteperk. pag. 259.Even whilſt they are deſtitute of the knowledge of Chriſt, yet God leaveth not himſelfe without witneſſe; and at the ſame time maketh knowne to them the truth of his power and goodneſſe, and doth conſerve a law written in their minds; which good things if they uſe well, or at the leaſt conſcienciouſly, God is ready to grant to them according to that text, [to him that hath ſhal be given. ] And further in the ſame page he ſaith thus; [ccOmnes homines aliqua vocatione vocantur, nempè per iſtam teſtificationem de quâ adduci poſſunt ut palpando eum invenient. &c. haec autem vo. a…o quanquā ſalu a…s no neſt, utp…e, per eam ſalus immediat… obtinenda eſt, ſed praecedanea poteſt dici ſalutari, quâ Chriſtus offertur, q…ae i…ſam rectè uſur patam ex Dei milericordia, ſequutura eſt. ibid. God calls all men with ſome kind of call, to wit, by that teſtification of God, by which they may be brought to grope after God, and ſo to find him, &c. which call, although it be not ſaving, ſo that ſalvation ſhall be immediately obteined by it, yet p. 57it may be ſaid to be precedaneous to that which is ſaving, wherein Chriſt himſelf is offered; which laſt out of the mercy of God is ready to follow the good uſe of the former.] And are not all theſe deviſed methods, one and the ſame with this which Mr. Goodwin excudeth? and do they not lay their foundation of Univerſal grace very low, even in the Bowels of nature it ſelf? and in all, as well in them, as in Mr. Goodwin, it amounteth to this, that God gives to all ſome natural abilities, with aſſiſting grace, which if they improve well, God will reveal Chriſt, and ſo give more grace till they come to be ſaved; according to that text, To him that hath ſhall be given; the loweſt ſtone of which foundation, I ſhall indeavour to raiſe, and to Anatomize this intricate method of Univerſal grace: To effect which, I ſhall make a little digreſſion not at all from the queſtion; yet from Mr. Goodwin, that I may exchange a word or two with the Remonſtrants in the examination of the ſaid two things. 1. How they prove that which is given to all to be grace. 2. How they prove it to be ſufficient. The reſt I ſhall examine when I return to Mr. Goodwin.

It is well known that the Doctrine of Univerſal ſufficient grace, is the ſtanding Pillar of their Doctrine in the ſecond Article, and hence is it that all that hold univerſal redemption, do alſo hold univerſal ſuffici…nt grace, and their mouths and pens do every where ſavour of this Doctrine. Let us therefore ſee in the firſt place how they prove that God gives that to all men without exception, which may truly be called grace And any that are exerciſed in them, may ſee that they do profeſſe this very roundly without heſitation. True indeed, in their Synodical writings in the forementioned place they give it the name of More general Grace, but Arminius a little more laxely; in the deſcription of their general call before mentioned▪ he ſaith thus (a)(a)quibus bonis ſi recte uſi fuiſſent, Deus ulteriorem gratiā ill…s conceſſurus eſt. Arm. antiperk. 259.All men have ſome knowledge of the power and goodneſſe of God, and ſuch gifts, which if they uſe well, God is ready to give further grace; where we have it called grace onelyonly by intimation, not expreſſely; he ſaith God would give more grace, which phraſe More Grace, implies ſome preceding grace: yet in another place he ſaith more largely thus (b)(b)Vide mihi. annon iſto dicto (Habenti d…bitur) promiſſio iſta contineatur quâ ſpondet Deus e ſupernaturali g…at…â illumm…turum qui lu rine naturali rectè utitar, aut ſaltem minùs malè. Antiperk. 218.Conſider with me whether or no in that ſaying (To him that hath ſhall be given) that promiſe is not herein contained, whereby God binds himſelf to give ſupernatural light to them, that uſe the light of nature well, or at leaſt leſſe evilly. So that now hee makes the Talents that are to be uſed to be natural light, and the increaſe to be ſupernatural grace; when if he had ſpoken home to the point of Univerſal grace; he ſhould have made the Talents as wel as the increaſe, that which is originally given to improve, as well as that which is given by way of reward, to be ſupernatural grace; for the argument is good againſt him out of his own words; for thus we may argue, if ſupernatural grace be not conferred, but upon the right uſe and improvement of natural abilities, then all men have not ſupernatural grace; and the reaſon is clear, becauſe they do not uſe the light of nature well, which expreſſes of Arminius when Molineus undertaketh to Anatomize, and urgeth againſt Arminius, thus, God in Scripture is no where ſaid to bind himſelf to give increaſe of grace to them▪ that uſe the p. 58light of nature well. Corvinus, who defendeth him, ſaith thus by way of reply: (c)(c)1. Non ab Arminio dici ſimpliciter à Deo dari incrementa gratiae lumine naturali rectè utenti, ſed luce illâ recte utenti per ad jutotium gratiae. (2) Nec dici ab illo Deum teneri incrementa dare; ſed tantum quod Deus vult ſine ullâ obligatione.1. It is not ſaid by Arminius ſimply thus, that God gives increaſe of grace to him that uſeth the light of nature well, but to him that uſeth nature well by the help of grace. 2. Neither is it ſaid by him, that God is bound to give the increaſe of grace, but onelyonly that God will do it without any obligation: But here Corvinus doth not defend, but chaſtiſe his Maſter; & good reaſon if he do not expreſſe himſelf in ſuch a fundamental point, (modo decenti) in ſuch a manner as becometh it; and I muſt tell alſo Corvinus, that both th…ſe replies are far from truth. For clear it is;

1 That he affirms ſimply that God gives increaſe of ſupernaturall grace to him that uſeth the light of nature well, without any mention of the leaſt ſyllable of aſſiſting grace, as any may judge that revieweth the forementioned quotation our of him; if any for Corvinus, can extract out of that text, the leaſt ſyllable leading to aſſiſting grace, I ſhall then ſay that Corvinus defends; but if not, he ſheweth not what he doth ſay, but what he ſhould have ſaid. Now if any ſhall ſay to this, that Arminius is ſo to be underſtood, becuſe ſometimes he expreſſeth himſelf to the ſu…l; I find him indeed thus in other places ſpeaking. (d)(d)Anne natura prorſus deſtituta gratiā & Spiritu Dei, inſtructa eſt notitia veritatis? &c. non Arbitror iſta dona naturae ſine gratiâ & ſpiritu Dei tribui poſſe citra injuriam gratiae divinae. Arm. reſp. ad A. Art. 31. Artic. 15.[But can nature altogether deſtitute of the grace and ſpirit of God, be inſtructed with the knowledge of God, &c. I do not think that ſuch natu…al gifts, without the grace and ſpirit of God can be granted, without manifeſt injury to the grace of God:] But this doth not at all reduce him to any clear diſcovery of the truth, but rather detect his fraud; for they may have the Spirit of God, and gifts of it, originally, and yet no ſupernatural grace given them, de novo, to uſe the gifts of nature well; becauſe according to their own principles, every man hath (Reliquias vitae Spiritualis) the Reliques of ſpiritual life; whereby they know ſomething of God, and are enabled to do the things contained in the law; which yet the Apoſtle ſaith, the Heathen do by nature; and this not onelyonly Arminius, but Corvinus himſelf ſaith, as I ſhall ſhew preſently: ſo that ſeeing his cleareſt words are liable to this charge of aequivocation, it ſavours of too much levity and inconſtancy to treat or the uſe of natural light, in ſo many places, without the leaſt hint of any new principle of aſſiſting grace; and I cannot but judge thus, that becauſe they cannot make good their Doctrine of Univerſal grace, without this pretended aſſiſting grace, he therefore ſometimes ſcatters ſuch expreſſions carrying a covert intimation thereof; but becauſe they find the proof of it from Scripture to be but ſlender, they moſt frequently let that paſſe untouched. But however, if the queſtion turn upon this hinge, it is very improvidently done of them, to let the whole credit of their cauſe hang upon their bare aſſertions; for they do not produce one Scripture in all their writings, to prove that God gives divine aſſiſting grace to inable men to uſe the light of nature well: and here the queſtion concerning univerſal grace ſticks betwixt us; They affirm that God gives to all men aſſiſting grace to uſe the light of nature well: We, on the other ſide deny it, and provoke them to produce one place of Scripture to prove it, and they have not produced it yet to p. 59his day. When Molineus in his Anatomy of Arminianiſme,Quod dicis falſum eſt. chap. 39. ſec. 2. chargeth them thus; God it no where ſaid to give to all men ſupernatural grace, to uſe the light of nature well: Corvinus onelyonly anſwers thus, That which thou ſaieſt is falſe, when it had been more becoming him to produce Scriptures, where it is ſaid, that that which is given to every man is called grace: But he produceth ſomething that pretendeth towards reaſon, and therefore I muſt leave Arminius, and ſpeak in a word or two to Corvinus. And in the firſt place, to tell him that it is much prejudicial to their cauſe to wave Scripture, and from reaſon onelyonly to ſeek for ſtabiliment in their own obſcure deductions, which are very obnoxious to ſcruple: which in the next place I ſhall examine. 1. He ſaith,Ibidem Neminem relinqui ſine teſtimonio. none are left without witneſſe; but it is as obſcure for us to know what teſtimony or witneſſe he meaneth: I ſuppoſe he underſtandeth that witneſſe mentioned, Acts 14.16. wherein God is ſaid not to leave himſelf without witneſſe, which text is ſo much inſiſted upon by them; but then could not Corvinus his acute reaſon tell him, that this is no ſatisfaction to Molineus charge, except he had alſo proved that this teſtimony is ſupernatural grace: the teſtimony there ſpoken of, is by thoſe fruitfull ſeaſons, ſhowres, and filling their hearts with gladneſſe; but this is far ſhort of that ſupernatu…al grace pretended by them. Thoſe that are given over to a reprobate ſenſe, and ſo natural as that they are without all knowledge of God, and ſo certainly without all aſſiſting grace; yet they had that teſtimony of the Deity, in ſhowres and fruitfull ſeaſons.

2. He ſaith Secondly, ſome Talents are given to all men: Omnibus aliqua talenta dari. ibidem.And what then? will it therefore follow that aſſiſting grace is given? I think not. Aſſiſting grace is none of the Talents that God gives ſo generally, but rather that natural light, and (reliquiae and ſcintillae luminis) the Law written in their heart.Dantur incrementa gratiae rectè utenti lamine naturali peradjutorium gratiae, foreign, The grace of God is not by themſelves ſaid to be a Talent, but (principium quo utuntur talenta) that principle by which the Talents are uſed. as Corvinus ſaith. God gives increaſe of grace to him that uſeth the light of nature well, by the grace of God aſſiſting him. now if the aſſiſting grace of God be not one of thoſe Talents, it is no plauſible argument to urge, aſſiſting grace is given to all, becauſe Talents are given to all; except he ſay, that where God gives natural gifts, he alwaies gives aſſiſting grace to enable them to uſe them well, which is not to prove the queſtion in hand, but to beg it.Iſta gratia quae data eſt ad hoc ut Deum …olamus non poteſt non eſſe ſupernaturalis, ibid.

3. That which is moſt plauſible is this, That grace of God which is given to that end that we may worſhip him, cannot be leſſe then ſupernatural, This is true, but nothing to the buſineſſe in hand, becauſe the queſtion is not this, Whether that grace given by God, to that end that men may worſhip him, be ſupernatural: but whether that grace be given or no to all men without exception; this we demand a proof of in all the Scripture: true indeed, the light of nature and works of providence diſcover that there is a God, and that he is to be worſhipped; thus far men by groping after God may come to know; but this is far ſhort of this (ut Deum colamus) for the actual worſhip of God cannot be without a rule, by the help of which we may worſhip him according to his own will: and p. 58this is the height of the Doctrine of Univerſal grace, They dare not call nature grace, leſt they ſhould come too near the Doctrine of Pelagius; and that God gives principles of aſſiſting grace, they have not yet proved, but onelyonly by theſe few infirm arguments, and all the world may yet take notice, that the proof yet remaineth to be made on their parts; and till they give us ſome Scriptures wherein that which God gives to every man without exception, is honoured with the name of grace; we ſhal judge them more abundant in aſſertions then in proofs, And beſides the want of proof, which lies as a ponderous ſtone in the way againſt that Doctrine. There is alſo the validity of an argument or two to take away, before they can paſs for plauſible Defenders of that faith: I ſhall therefore addreſſe my ſelf to urge them with ſome few arguments to prove, that that which God giveth to every man cannot be called grace; neither doth God give to every man that aſſiſting grace, whereby they may, and to that end that they might, uſe the light of nature well.