therefore the former stands upon the same ground And whereas it is said that if Adam had resisted the Tempter and stood he had crossed the decree of God which is impossible because Gods Decree is unalterable I answere and affirme the like of his prescience or foreknowledge which is as infallible as his decree for if Adam had resisted the tempter and had stood God had beene deceived in his foresight concerning his fall and this Argument is as much as if the skie fall wee shall have Larkes but it doth not fall and therefore they be not easily had And where it is further said that if it should bee granted that God decreed that Adam should eat and die and yet commanded him that hee should not eat to the end that hee might live this were to make the Lord contrary to himselfe I answer denying the consequence for these things are not contrary namely for God to command Adam not to eat as having Authority so to doe to the end hee might trie his willing obedience and in case he fell to discover the hainousnesse of his sinne and disobedience and God foreseeing hee would fall to permit him so to doe is no contradiction at all but a pure truth for if men were elected in Christ before the foundation of the world then was the fall presupposed and that they were so Paul affirmeth it Ephes 1.3.4 and therefore in this point there is no danger at all And where it is further said if there were no such decree concerning Adam then not concerning his posterity neither To which I answer that there is such a Decree concerning Adam to permit him to doe the evill which was forbidden Ergo there is such a Decree concerning his posterity Also to permit them to doe those things which they doe that are forbidden And whereas it is further said that if any still will hold that God decreed any mans condemnation then it is for transgression of the Law which no man could doe before he was created I answer that although no man could transgresse the Law befor hee was created yet God could foresee that man would transgresse a Law before man was created and decreed to suffer him so to doe and decreed to punish him accordingly And wherereas it is further demanded whether God decreed the condemnation of Adams person and supposed the answer will be no because God decreed to send his sonne to redeeme him from Death and if him why not all his Posterity seeing it is written Ioh. 3.16 That God so loved the World that he gave his onely begotten Sonne that whosoever beleeved in him should not perish but have Everlasting Life To which I answer that it doth not follow from hence that God hath decreed to doe for all alike in causing of them to beleeve Ezek. 3.6.7 Mat. 11.21 for though it may be concluded that God gave Christ and Christ gave himselfe for all alike yet he doth not give the Doctrine of the same to all alike Ephes 2.8 Phil. 1.28 much lesse doth he give Faith which is the effect of the same Doctrine to all alike and therefore is said to be the gift of God not in common as the Preaching is but in speciall and peculiar as the Election is Rom. 11.7 and therefore true Faith is called the Faith of Gods elect Tit. 1.1 given onely to some and not to others Mat. 13.11 as being those that are Predestinated and therefore effectually called justified and glorified Rom. 8.30 but others he suffers to walke in their owne wayes Act. 14.16 as the Vessels of wrath fitted to destruction Rom. 9.22 And the Reprobates and wicked of the World could not do such wickednesse as they doe but that it pleaseth God to suffer such dishonourable wayes and practises to be for a time as knowing how to bring forth his owne glory in their just deserved damnation But he doth not suffer his Elect to walke in their owne wayes but doth prevent them that they escape Eternall Damnation 1 Cor. 11.32 That he might glorifie himselfe in them in his mercy as upon the Vessels of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory Whereas you conclude with this request that your positions against particular Election may be either receiv'd or answered I now conclude with the like having as I suppose sufficiently answered this that you would either shew wherein the insufficiency of my answer lies or yeeld thereunto An Answer to a Letter written by R. H. sending to shew the contradiction that is betwixt Christs dying for all and Gods Election of some The which Answer sheweth that there is no contradiction betwixt these two but a sweet concord by T. L. First you say you write to shew the contradiction that is betwixt universall redemption and particular election and how doe you doe this you aske the question how Christ died for all men seeing he never intended salvation to them To this I answer that Christ may be said to have died for all men although he never intended to make all men to believe in his death for salvation you say if God hath onely elected some persons and rejected all the rest then there is no way of recovery made for them that are rejected But Christ hath made a way of recovery out of the lost estate for all those for whom be died Ergo. To this I answer that Christ hath made or purchased away of recovery for all men if they doe not reject him and it also but election is a fore-apointment that such persons are elected shall believe and be recovered and if the rest doe not it is their owne fault because they beleeve not the truth which preached Rom. 11.5.7 Iohn 16.9 Mar. 3.5 You say generall redemption extends it selfe to all particular Election it opposeth it and saith no not to all but to some onely This I deny and say Election doth effect that some doe believe but it doth not oppose any in point of beleeving and so it doth not follow that although man doe not effect in himselfe in himselfe faith and cause himselfe to be elected as is imagined that he is not the cause of his owne destruction by the refusall of grace offered and I put the case that none were elected at all would it then come to passe that generall redemption which extends it selfe to all would save all because you say particular Election intends onely the salvation of some if not then would I aske the reason why if you say because all doe not believe then you say true and what if none believe then none should be saved whereby you may see that although generall Redemption extends it selfe to all to all yet neverthelesse if none beleeve none should be saved and that none would beleeve unlesse they were elected appeares in that none would beleeve unlesse God worke it such evill is in mans nature as doth continually oppose the Doctrine of grace untill they bee overcome thereby which Doctrine for God to afford to
and are sanctified before they are saved but most properly is the question whether Faith Sanctity and obedience be the cause of Election this doe I absolutely deny Secondly I doe accuse you of weaknesse because you doe not answer to the second part of the reason at all which if you had I conceive you would have found it to strong for you and therefore it is meere weaknesse to shun the strength of an Argument to prove this I expresse the former Argument by me framed and it was this That which God doth in time he did appoint or decree to doe before time but he doth cause some to beleeve in Christ and not others Ergo he did so decree before This you say proves not particular Election and doth it not indeed I would put you in mind that it doth for it sheweth that God doth in time cause some to beleeve and not others Ergo he did elect their persons and appoint and decree them to beleeve in Christ before Now to prove this I shewed that the sole cause of the difference proceeded from the Lord why one beleeved and not another by these Scriptures Mat. 13.11 Where Christ saith To you it is given to know the Secrets of the Kingdome of Heaven but to others it is not given Phil. 1.29 To you it given for Christ not onely to beleeve in him but also to suffer for his sake Phil. 2.13 for it is God which worketh in you both the will and the deed The Conclusion then is this if God work Faith in some in time and not in others then hee did appoint so to doe before and consequently did elect them and not others the former is by me proved and not by you disproved nor denyed for you make no answer thereunto whether God God causeth some to beleeve above others or no this you speake nothing to at all and the other you grant to be a truth namely what hee doth in time he decreed to doe before Ergo he did elect and appoint some to beleeve and not others And thus you may behold your selfe to deale very weakly and the strength to prevaile against you deale therefore more strongly next time and more punctually or else yeeld to the truth Thirdly I doe accuse you of errour in the sequell of your discourse in that you make a respective Decree of Election in reference unto what man will doe in point of beleeving Sanctification obedience and perseverance which if it bee so then man is the cause of his Election and adoption and then such a person may rejoyce in what he hath done in causing himselfe to be elected and adopted but against this I doe set the manifest words of Scripture 1 Cor. 4.7 who is it that hath separated thee or caused thee to differ from another man you say a mans selfe by his voluntary beleeving and practising the duties of Sanctification obedience and perseverance but against this the text is considerable what hast thou that thou hast not received if you will now say that the Gospell is Gods gift but the ability to beleeue obey and presevrere is in man or else God should be Vnjust to condemne us for not doing that with we have no Power to doe here would I have you to hold to the Text that either you have not this Power as you are men simply or if you have then another man hath it as well as you then doth Paul aske the question still who hath separated or caused thee to differ from another man if you say you used the ability or power which you had aright which if another had done as I have he had sped as well as I then this will follow that you have separated or caused your selfe to differ from another man by a right use of the power you had in your selfe above another and have not received it and may glory as if you had not received it but fie upon this filthy error which doth so set up man and take from God contrary to the mind of Paul in this place and also in the 1 Cor. 1.27 28 29. Where it is said that God electeth foolish weak vile despised things and things that are not one end is to bring to naught things that are another end is that no Flesh should glory in his presence in Ephes 1.4.5 6. compared with chap. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13. Wee may see that he choseth those that were dead in sins Children of wrath Gentiles uncircumcision such as were without Christ strangers from the Common-wealth of Israel aliens from the Covenants of Promise such as had neither Faith nor Hope but were a farre off without God in the World yea even at this time when they were dead by sinnes ver 5. then did God set his great love upon them ver 4. to chuse them Chap. 4. that he might worke Faith and Holinesse in them Chap. 2.8.10 that thereby he might set forth his rich Grace and kindnesse and praise ver 7 Chap. 1.6 and that he might take from man all occasion of arrogating to himselfe any boasting at all Chap. 2.8 9. thus I conceive I have replied sufficiently to your answer and would put you in mind that there were two reasons more which you have not spoken too at all and it is much that you 〈…〉 three Reasons 〈…〉 two of them 〈…〉 you have ansâ—â—red the 〈◊〉 to my purpose 〈…〉 have noâ— spoken to 〈…〉 them 〈…〉 to prove the thing in a 〈◊〉 That 〈…〉 is the 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 Now the 〈◊〉 why God sends the Gospel 〈◊〉 be preached which is the 〈◊〉 of Faith 〈◊〉 plenâ—â—â—sly in the plaâ—â— then 〈…〉 of his Elâ—â—t and chosen ones in thâ—â— place 〈…〉 Act. 18 6.9â— 11. compâ—â—â— with the 16.7 8 9 10. 〈◊〉 Election is 〈◊〉 cause of Faith Eternall life is the gift of God Rom 6.22 therefore all the causes concurring to 〈…〉 bee the gift of God aâ—so But some persons onely are 〈…〉 those 〈◊〉 as those in whom onely 〈…〉 Faith is a cause concurring to 〈…〉 Eâ—go Election 〈◊〉 cause and Faith as its proper effect it 's the gift of God Here followeth an answer to Letter which was 〈…〉 In which answer is shewed how that the some and originall sinne and corruption of nature is derived by the 〈…〉 ration from Adam LOving friend according to you◠〈◊〉 have adâ—â—ssed my selfe to you in these few following 〈◊〉 for youâ— perusall You say wee have beene in dispute about the soules comming from God you say I deny it I conceive you are mistaken for I only say the soule doth not come from God immediately with out the meanes of the parents for by thâ— meanes of the Parents hold the soule to come from God and the body also You say it is impossible for the 〈◊〉 of one 〈…〉 the Spâ—ritâ— fâ—â— other because the Spirit is the 〈◊〉 To which I answer separate the Spirit of the 〈◊〉 from the flesh in the act of generation and
men effectually proportionable to the measure of corruption even to the taking of it away in some and not in others by the extent of his providence proceeds onely from the good pleasure of his will differently as the same is extended by his continuall government of the world so then it doth appeare that Election is a thing super-added over and above besides the meanes of Redemption to cause some to beleeve which otherwayes would effect the same You say they contradict one another in their ends which they cannot doe if they be truths both as for example you say the end of generall Redemption is the salvation of all and the avoiding of respect of persons but the end of particular Election is this and but this namely to save this person and condemne that and because he will doe it he will doe it and can give no Reason nor shew any cause why to cleare his Justice or vindicate his Mercy To which I answer that the will of God is reason enough for the disposing of his gifts of Grace to whomsoever he pleaseth both for the clearing of his Justice and vindicating of his Mercy Secondly I say to command and provide meâ—nes for all or â—ending to the salvation of all and yet to decree the salvation onely of some is no contradiction at aâ—l but onely a wise disposall of the matter so as not to bee wholy frustrate of his Commands and meanes which otherwise would come to passe if he should leave to mankind the whole disposall of the businesse Thirdly I answer concerning respect of persons wee are to marke and mind what it is and in it wee are to consider two things first that it is alwayes something in the person for which he is respected and secondly that the thing is unsufficient why he should be so respected but oâ—herwise to give unlike Gifts to persons that are alike is no respect of Persons or if it be then God is such a respâ—cter of persons as may be proved plenteously for the people of the Iewes were as bad as other Nations and yet God gave them more and greater Gifts then he did to other Nations Ezek. 16.47 48. Deut. 7.7 Act. 7.39 40. And likewise Manasseh who did more evill then the Heathen whom the Lord had destroyed 2 Kings 21.9 2 Chron. 33.9.10 Neither were the 42. Children worse then Manasseh and the Iewes living in his time which notwithstanding perished and the other were spared as is to be scene 2 Kings 2.24 and God gave them no time to repent of their sinnes as he did to Manasseh and the people who notwithstanding when the Lord spake unto them would not regard And Paul likewise exceeded many other in wickednesse or at least was as bad and many of them which yet had no miraculous apparition of Christ to effect their conversion Faith and Grace as Paul had therefore the dealing of God in communicating of Gifts doe differ though the persons doe not differ but be one as bad as the other yea many those which have the most and greatest gifts bestowed upon them are the worst and therefore in Election if there be any difference God chuseth the worst both of persons and things 1 Cor. 1.26 27 28. the end is that he might avoyd respect of any thing in the persons or things which hee chuseth either present or foreseene ver 29. for what any person or thing is in goodnesse hee or it is Ephe. 2.19 Iam. 1.17 that he or â—â—is by the worke of God vers 30. the end is that hee might have the whole praise vers 31. Fourthly I say if God leave the matter wholy to man in generall Redemption as that hee doth Elect Persons no otherwise then in Relation to qualities then he hath respect to persons and the reason is because hee hath respect to something in the person for which he doth respect him and yet the thing is insufficient why he should be â—o respected for according to that position more should have been chosen but with respect to what they doe which others doe not now it remaines to be examined whether that which some do of themselves by their owne power puts a worth and excellency upon their Persons to cause God to chuse them above others if not then I demand why and upon what reason God should chuse them above others and againe if that which some doe of themselves and by their owne power put a worth and excellency upon their Persons to 〈◊〉 God to chuse them above others thâ—n Paul â—rreth in saving that Election is or favour or Grace Rom. 11.5 6. Now I conceive it will not be said there is a worth or excellency upon the person of any man by what he â—oth by his owne power in point of beleeving Sanctification obedience and perseverance to cause God to chuse him and if not then is God a respectâ—r of Persons and not just but partiall because hee doth respect one more then another and yet the thing for which hee is respected doth not deserve why he should bee so respected and according to the Argument it is all one as if a Judge should save some Malefactor because he is rich strong wise beautifull or because neere of kindred whereas hee will condemne another because hee is a stranger or evill favoured poore foolish or weake which were partiality And on the other side and if any will affirme that what some doe of themselves by their own power in point of beleeving Sanctification obedience and perseverance put a worth and excellency upon their persons above others to cause God to chuse them the absurdities will bee more horrible which what they will be I leave to you to conceive and judge of In the next place you say you come to answer some of my Scriptures that I bring to prove particular Election and first you begin with my saying that they which are in time saved were formerly appointed so to bee you say it is a very truth but nothing at all for particular Election and why doth it not you say it proves yours to bee a truth also for all that are or shall bee saved were formerly appointed so to bee but who be they not any person abstract from Faith Sanctification or obedience to the Gospell as you say I must prove if I will prove particular Election To which I answer I doe observe in your answer subtilty weaknesse and error and first for Subtilty it is observable that you say who are they that are or shall be saved and then you answer not any person abstract from Faith Sanctifie c. and herein you doe subtilly turne the question from Election to Salvation thereby insinuating as if wee should say that some persons abstract from Faith Sanctification and should be saved whereas the proper question is who be they that are elected or more properly whether men beleeve before they be elected wee know grant and agree that all that are saved doe beleeve