in y ◠same verse if your eyes had not dazled you might haue seene that the Apostle after his thankes giuing for his deliuerance from the danger of that same bodie of death against which he had exclamed confesseth that euen then as touching his minde he serued the law of God but in his flesh the law of sinne Which place is as cleare as the sun-shine not onelie to shew the falshood of your first reason against our interpretation of the 7. to the Rom. but also to proue so your great shame the trueth of the generall assertion aforesaide namelie that The regenerate are not free frō sinne Yet these are not all the foiles you receiue by it for it cutteth likewise the throte of your second reason before it haue time to draw one breath of life for where you say Therefore after this he thanketh God in Christ that he was deliuered from that bodie of sinne which made him to doe that euil he would not and to leaue vndone the good he would You would make vs belieue that Paul in this place was a changed man so as he could no more sin vnwillinglie as before which purpose of yours now you sée is preuented and therefore your reason spoilde yet ere I passe I must admonish the Reader to consider of what spirite this sauoureth that in alledging the 25. verse which soundeth thus I thanke my God through Iesus Christ our Lord. Now therefore euen I in my minde doe serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of Sinne. He bringeth it out thus He thanketh God in Christ and so cutteth off all the rest but chopping into the roome thereof these wordes that he was deliuered from that bodie of sin which made him to do that euil he would not and to leaue vndone the good he would A sentence I confesse of like length but neither of like nature nor trueth If anie say for E. G. For now I vnderstand he is dead that he added that part not as to haue it taken for the wordes of scripture but the sense of the place I could easely admit that answere were it not for the sakes of some of his sect who as I vnderstand can not read at all and yet are very stiffe in his opinions I know not how they haue béene this way abused Besides it is not comuenient in citing of scripture to sow anie peeces of our owne into it without putting some partition wall betwixt or bringing in the seruant in some differing weed from his maister that the one be not taken for the other of the commers in Moreouer if hee bring those wordes for the meaning of the place yet hee is too impudent and blasphemous presuming to speake directlie against the spirite of God which it is cleare that hee doth when the text saith Paule had yet such an enimie of flesh about him as serued the law of sinne and this man saith Paule was now deliuered from that bodie of sinne as made him do the euil he would not Two thinges in their substance flat contrarie though chaunge of wordes at first would seeme to couer it But lest we should maruaile at this dealing he makes a custome of the matter for the next place he bringeth out of the beginning of the 8. chap. where hee would faine make S. Paule speake according to his humor for whereas the text is There is now therefore no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus which walke not according to the flesh but according to the spirite You must vnderstand it as it is thus paraphrasticallie deliuered by him To them which are in Christ Iesus there is no condemnation or no such bodie of death which is the cause of our condemnation for they walke not after the flesh as he was forced to doe by the law of sinne when as he did the euil he would not and left vndone the good hee would but they walke after the spirite and so doe the good they would His bolonesse here as before whether it sauour of Babilon or no I leaue it to the christian Reader to iudge But three thinges must be obserued and examined wherein beyond al reason warrant he abuseth this place of the Apostle First for the worde condemnation by that he wil haue vnderstoode the bodie of death therein without anie necessitie transforming the effect into the cause as though he would cōpel the holie ghost to speake for his purpose but without all probabilitie both forasmuch as that word is no where vsed in that sense as also this verse repeating the argument of the 5. chap. 1. verse of the same Epistle concerning iustification by faith onely proued by an argument drawne from the effectes toucheth nothing at all that speciall obiection which hee answereth in the latter ende of the 7. chapter whereby he was occasioned so to handle that conflict of the flesh and the spirite So that then we sée if E. G. would haue taken this worde condemnation in his naturall sense and not malitiously peruerted it as one that would wilfullie runne into the pit he should haue béene so farre off finding his bodie of death in it as that much rather the sunne shine of comfort would appeared vnto him to haue banished the night of dark discomfort that came vpon him in his sicknesse when as this place rather would haue told him there is no condemnation towardes thee if thou be Christes agréeably whereto the spirite saith in the 33. and 34. verses afterwarde who shall laye anie faultes against the elect of God It is God that iustifieth who is hee that shall condemne It is Christ that is dead yea rather that is risen againe who sitteth also at the right hand of God and entreateth for vs. The second thing I obserue is concerning these wordes They walke not after the flesh which walking he taketh to be al one with that S. Paule calleth the law of sinne in his members whereas he might aswell haue compared a beast vnto a man for by that other law in his members it is manifest he meant the power of sinne which gate oportunities manie times against him although in his inner man to his might he made resistance as all open eyes may sée both by the opposing of the law in the members to the inner man as also by the whole suite and circumstances of the text Contrariewise in the other place Paule speaketh of the minde giuing obedience to the law of the members which he calleth To walke according to the flesh as when there is no resistance made to sinne So that her◠the holie Ghost speaketh of a whole man willingly going after sin there of a man falling but sometimes through infirmitie also there he sheweth in what respect the law hath a worke of death in our mortal bodies according to the obiection in the 13. verse but here he teacheth a note to know our selues truly iustified by euen our sanctification according to the matters handled from
not delightfull to the flesh but if by flesh he meane whole Paul as by his next words It was a messenger of Sathan sent to buffet his flesh not to tempt him to sin he must néeds doo or elshée corrupteth the text then the first part of his argument is false where he saith Sin is delightfull to the flesh For it is proued before that sin is loathsome to the regenerate man and he doth it vnwillingly whensoeuer he falleth into sin So here we see this man would sophistically beguile vs with a failation of Homonymie Concerning that he saith This prick was a messenger of Satan sent to beat or buffet his flesh not to tempt him to sin Let the Reader note first that of is here rashly put in betwixt Messenger Sathan Secondly he sheweth his accustomed sawcines in restraining to a part that which the text attributeth to the whole as where Paul saith The Angell Sathan did buffet him E. G. saith He did buffet his flesh His meaning thereby hee sheweth soone after for he would haue vs to vnderstand by this prick and buffeting of Sathan nothing but the outward humblings and afflictions of Pauls bodie which afterward indéed he reckoneth vp as things wherein he made his profit and reioycing also But what reasons bringeth hée that the place must thus be vnderstood Forsooth Because Paul reioyced and tooke pleasure in these his infirmities which hee would neuer haue done if they had been vices and such fleshly infirmities as they speake of First marke his words Such fleshly infirmities as they speake of What may he mean by this think you If you read the first page of his book where he maketh a flood of slandrous spewings to drowne if it were possible all the sincerest Preachers of the Gospell in you shall sée he would haue the simple take it thus that our Preachers doo extenuate and hide the gréeuousnes and ouglenes of the grossest sinnes in the world with the nice and soft terme of infirmities which is so open a lie as it bewrayeth there was no feare of God before his eies Now for his reason if he will thus meane by infirmities whoredom drunkennes oppression c. We are so far from vnderstanding them to be anie cause of Pauls reioycing who was far from their infection as that we denie the temptations lust and eggings of sin which héere we take for the prick in his flesh or the buffets of Sathan which are by his continuall stirring vp those lusts of concupiscence yea or yet his infirmities indéed whereby he meaneth his weake condition and necessarie subiection vnto these things to bee anie true causes of his glorying no more if you remember well then the law could be truly said to be the cause of sin for that the naturall man was the more stirred vp to rebellion by it And yet it is true that Paul gloried in his infirmities not in respect that they were vncleannes in the sight of God for in that regard they humbled him and kept him from being proud of his reuelations but in respect that they were the waie that the Lord had chosen both to doo him best good and also to aduance his own power by for so he plainly expresseth it when he saith Therefore I glorie rather in my infirmities that the power of Christ might dwell in mee And the diuine answere it selfe said to him My grace is sufficient for thee for my power is made perfect through weaknes If beside this refutation of his reason some require more to the clearing of this place to our side I wil adde two or thrée arguments moe out of the text it selfe to proue Pauls infirmitie in this place to be a sinful weaknes and not the outward pouertie reproches persecutions anguishes for Christ which he afterward remembreth First because those can bee vnderstood but of a bodely or outwarde weaknes but by this is ment a spirituall or inward weaknes which I proue by the very cause of this weaknes which is the prick there mentioned which being no outward thing but inwardly fastened in the flesh for so y ◠text giueth hath his proper effect not in outward abasing of the person in the eies of men for that doo those things that come to him from without but for that it inwardly reprocheth straineth and so abaseth him in the eies of the Lord. Herehence I gather my second argument in that this weaknes was such as humbled Paul in the sight of God so as though he had the comforts of excellent reuelations yet he durst not boast himselfe by them for the priuitie of his inward vncleannes which hée knew was open vnto the eies of the Lord. Now we know there is nothing in the worlde can make vs hang downe our heads before our God but sin only for concerning all outward persecutions and anguishes wée haue a recompencing comfort and ioy in the presence of our God euen in the mids of their enduring so as in them we are more then conquerours as the same Apostle testifieth in another place Therefore it must néeds bée vnderstood a sinfull infirmitie which Paul there acknowledged in himselfe My third argument I take from that that the Apostle prayed simply for the remouing of it which because it cannot be confirmed by a like example in all the scriptures naie is plainly disallowed by the practise of the Apostles Act. 5. v. 41. And by Paul himselfe likewise in sundrie places it proueth strongly that outward afflictions maie not be vnderstood thereby but that sinful weaknes which euen then remained in him And so thus we see this place wel agréeing with the former of the 7. to the Rom. And to proue the question of the regenerate mans weaknes equally with it Againe for further proofe of that question because by the word of two or thrée witnesses a matter standeth firme there is added vnto these a third place out of the Epistle to the Galathians in these words The flesh lusteth against the spirite and the spirite against the flesh and these are between themselues contraries so as you cannot doo whatsoeuer you would E. G. fearing y ◠light of this place would faine if he could at least make our eies dimmer in séeing it and thus he answereth The flesh indeed will lust in all men against the spirit but that it shall so preuaile against the spirite in the regenerate man that he shall not be abled by the spirit to do the things he would that I deny An answere not only false but frantick False I say two waies first in that he saith The flesh will lust in all men against the spirit as though all men had the spirit Secondly in that hée benieth That it can so preuaile against the spirit in the regenerate man as though he that hath the spirit of God is not a regenerate man Surely me think this geare hangeth togither like the words of a frantike man But here
the subiects or matters whereon it worketh for nothing is more common in the whole course of nature Let the sunne be an example for all which by one and the same shine of his beames doth not onely soften the waxe harden the claye but also most comfortably fur ther the sprout of the fruites of the earth and yet horribly encreaseth putrefaction in all other thinges that haue not the séed of life in them His next diuision framed against this doctrine that the holy Ghost meaneth him to be the seruant of sinne and of the diuel who willingly with delight committeth sin not misliking it nor striuing against it partly is answered as his place of Peter the rest is not worthie a word of answere in regard of the matter being nothing but a heape of friuolous words either quite from the question or els absurdly begging the question Onely for the simpler sort I will take some occasions that it offreth me to laye abroad some pointes which perhaps the Reader might wish to be instructed in for the further clearing of the controuersie First for the doctrine which hee putteth downe with that poysomous title according to his accustomed lewdnesse I graunt it to bee ours so it be rightly vnderstood Namely that by the words misliking and striuing be not vnderstood euerie light pricke or remorse of conscience which euen the wicked haue not by coÌ„trarie affection of their will for they sinne with all their heart but by the contradiction of their iudgement which they haue by the light of nature whereby they can inwardly controll themselues in committing the grosser sins but an vnfamed hatred and detestation of sinne which the loue of GOD hath wrought in our heartes whereby groweth that warre and spirituall battaile which Paule speaketh off and which none but the children of God haue in them As for his impudent insinuation which in euery place he offreth as though we exempted grosse continuing sinners according to his diuelish accusation euen such as make but an hipocritical profession of religion from the number of the seruants of sinne and of the diuel I will answere it no more supposing his booke doth now blush alreadie thereat But some will aske if the regenerat man do so hate sinne as I haue declared how it commeth to passe that he can fall into sinne at anie time I answere that it falleth out by reason of the vnregenerate condition that is in him sith as I haue aboundantly proued our inherent righteousnesse is in this life but begone in vs. And when I speake of a beginning of inherent righteousnesse I meane such a beginning as hath a dayly procéeding encrease euen as it is saide from strength to strength Which whosoeuer féeleth not in him selfe in some answerable measure to his graces receiued I except onely the afflicted conscience during the storme of affliction let him not flatter himselfe he is not yet in the state of the childe of God And in this exacting of holie life our preachers are so farre from being behind E.G. that he is not worthie to be named the same day they are For he reckoneth it sufficient or to be out of the compasse of daunger if we be able to abstaine from such grosse sins as hee babbleth off in euerie place as though there were no other sins to be spoken off els But they make in comparison small reckoning of him that hath but so farre preuailed for manie ciuile men for other respects then the reuerend loue of God are séene to absteine from those sinnes therefore do they also with all instancie pâ—â—test vnto vs that we must resist euen the first motions of sin and goe into the field with our affections euerie day And when they acknowledge the life of the regenerate not to bee without sinne they speake not that either to deny good works or that they thinke not the good workes of regenerate men to be pleasing vnto god wherby to dull our desier and weaken our members to labour after them but only to stoppe the way of presumption against vs and to make vs vnderstand and sée our vncleannes and impuritie to the perceauing wherreof we are blockish and more then blynd Here hence another question semeth to rise namely whether the regenerate man can possibly fall into anie of the grosser sins In a word the examples of Dauid and Peter do answere yea The euidence of which examples E.G. séeing so full against him deuised this most vnlearned and prophane shift to auoid it to wit that when such are ouercome of their corruption and so commit such sinnes they are destitute of the spirite of Christ and loose the grace of Gods children or of their new birth and regeneration vntil it be renewed againe in them by repentance This is that monster of often regeneration which he made shew off before in his second diuision An egge verie worthie the crow that laied it But let vs sée what he can say for it why we should suffer it to be hatched Peters example he subtilly ouerslippeth But Dauid he saith did therefore praye diligently when he was ouercome of murther and adulterie that God would renew a right spirite in him or giue vnto him a new a right spirite that he would not take his holie spirite from him to wit as he did for the time hee was ouercome of those two horrible sinnes And further he saith also he prayed that God would giue vnto him a new and cleane heart whereby we vnderstand that for the time the grace of his new birth was lost and the image of God was wholy defaced in him A heauie iudgement that you had no better vnderstanding How grosly he abuseth here the text with his 〈◊〉 glosses I hope there is none that either reading or hearing the text will not espy it For whereas Dauid prayeth God to renew a right or as the chiefest translate a firme spiâ—iâ—â— in him it is manifest he prayeth not there fâ—r the spirite of God first because in the next verse following he maketh petition concerning the holie Ghost Secondly the context and epithete leadeth that Dauid by these wordes required one speciall effect of the spirite to be wrought in his minde namely of strength firmitie to be stedfast in the obedience of the Lord hereafter The context I say sheweth it for the words are these Create in me O God a clean heart or as some translate a cleane mind and renew a firme spirite within me Nothing is more sutable then when as the affections are cleansed afiesh that in the next worke stablenesse and constancie be added vnto them But if there were no more saue onely the nature of the word renew it were inough to conuince this frensie of often regeneration for that argueth that Dauid prayed not for y e thing that hee was absolutely without The like shame receiueth his cause in the next verse Cast me not from thy presence and take not away
thy holyspirite from me Dauid saw his offence so great and so felt the terror of Gods displeasure in his conscience that he was well-â—ere the doore of despaire knowing that his sins had deserued that God should vtterlie withdraw his spirite from him Whereupon yet he cryeth vnto him that he would not and therehence he that is in his wits must néeds conclude that it was not Lastly whereas vpon this petition Create in me a cleane heart E. G. gathereth that therefore the grace of his new birth was lost the image of God wholy defaced in Dauid it must néeds be that the spirite of slumber had oppressed him For who prayeth not for this vnto God euerie day And although Dauid had vnderstanding of a greater foulenes hereby then euerie man ordinarily in prayer hath you see that is nothing to warrant this coÌ„clusion which standeth only vpon y â— false principle he that hath not a cleane heart is not regenerate Thus first you sée E. G. can shew no good reason why his monster of often regeneration should be suffered to liue Now will I on the other side by the grace of God proue that it ought of right to dye First I reason thus against it Whosoeuer hath one continuall abiding of y e spirit of God in him hath also oâ—e coÌ„tinual state of his regeneratioÌ„ but y e child of God hath one coÌ„tinual abiding of the spirit of God in him as is manifest in this example of Dauid therefore he doth neuer any more become vnregenerate SecoÌ„dly they that haue both their entrance their standing by mere grace cannot be excluded by works but y â— regenerate haue both their entring standing in that state by mere grace therfore their fallinges do not vnregenerate them Thirdly he that once falleth away after he is enlightned can no more be restored the reason is because there is no more sacrifice for sin whereby he should be restored but E. G. graunteth that the grace of the new birth may be lost and the image of God wholy defaced for a time which is all one with falling away it should follow therefore that such can no more be restored by repentance Which incoÌ„uenience I earnestly request this mans followers to marke Lastly the baptisme of water is an argument y â— our regeneratioÌ„ is but once wrought in vs for therefore also is it being the signe but once to be added vnto vs. Whereas if regeneration were to be twise or thrise repeated and wrought in vs then also the same baptisme must as oft be repeated and receiued of vs. Thus then we sée the trueth is that regeneration once wrought in vs by the holie Ghost is also continuallie preserued in vs by the same vnto the end And that this mans doctrine of often regenerating is false absurd and extreamely dangerous and therefore such a monster as all the louers of trueth ought of duetie vnto God laye violent handes thereon that it may not liue Like as he that hath once lost his way is readier for the most part to wander still from it then to hit vpon the right path againe so in like maner fared it with E. G. who hauing runne into the error of often regeneration laboureth next to establish it with putting cleane â—â—t the spirite of Christ in him that was once regenerate And therefore now he saith It is manifest in the word of God that if we be not stirred vp to take heed wee may quench so put cleane out the spirite of Christ we may fall away from the grace of God we may destroy the temple of God we may be broken off from the vine Christ Iesus c. First let the Reader note that the question here differeth nothing in effect from the last before handled Which was That the regenerate might fall from his state of regeneration for a time and so implyed an often regeneration in the saints Which hauing now by the grace of God with sound cleare arguments sufficiently ouerthrowne the force likewise of this must needes bee fallen together with it So as there onely remaineth that we examine these places of scripture and satisfie the Reader in those thinges wherein they séeme to make shew of doubtfulnes vnto him It is writen 1. Thes 5. 19. Quench not the spirice Heb. 12. 15. Beware that none of you fall away from the grace of God Againe 1. Cor. 3. 17. If anie man destroy the temple of God him will God destroy and cap. 6. 15. Shall I take the members of Christ and make them the members of an harlot also Ioh. 15. 4. Abide in me I in you as the braunch can not bring forth fruite of it selfe vnlesse it abide in the vine so neither can you vnlesse you abide in me Lastly in the 5. of Mat. 13. verse If the salt haue lost his saltnesâ—e c. The conclusion E. G. maketh out of these places is Therefore all these thinges may come vpon vs to wit wee may quench the spirite fall froÌ„ the grace of God c. Which conclusion I hope shall only shew this by and by that this man was very wittie to beguile him selfe But first we might lawfullie diminish the number of his places for the first place of the Corinths if it be translated destroy the temple of God the word destroy is to be vnderstood as an excessiue speach comprehenâ—inng the end of a carnall kind of preaching the Gospel not that Paule spake there of any art that simply had the force to destroy the temple of God in his children but onely in respect of it owne nature in which consideration euerie wicked course in the Church of God tendeth so much as it may to the destruction of the whole but God vpholdeth â—iâ— Saints with his owne hand and therefore Paule threatketh destruction to those that should offer such an occasion And according to this sense of the place the best interpreters translate it corrupting or deâ—â—â—ing the temple of God which it seemeth many conceited Corinthians as much as in them laye by their carnall eloquence dayly brought to passe Thus if E.G. be graunted but the true sense of this place he can conclude nothing for his own purpose by it For his question is of the depriuing of our selues of the true grace of God receiued and this place speaketh but of giuing occasion to corrupt others But admit this place goe for his purpose let vs likewise receiue al the rest of his word without examination and frame â—â—is argument thus in his forme Whatsoeuer the scriptures diswadeth vs that may we fall into but they diswade vs from the euil here specified therefore we may fall into them I answere he must vnderstand by the word we a whole congregatioÌ„ generally professing the gospel such as were those to whom the Apostle wrote And such a one I say doth consist of two kindes of men which are called in the scriptures sanctified iustified and elect The first