actuall chusing of David to the Kingdom of Israel was that by which he had first actuall right to that Kingdom to which he had right before onely in Gods decree and of which afterwards he had possession So Gods actuall chusing of a man to the Kingdom of heaven is that by which he hath first actuall right to that Kingdom to which he had no right before saue in Gods decree Gods chusing a man therfore actually as they speak to the Kingdom of heaven is the very giving of him faith and holinesse for by these he hath this actuall right to eternall life and glory If therfore Gods chusing men actually opposed to his chusing them in decree be his giving them actuall faith and repentance then their faith and repentance goes not before Gods choise but on the contrary his chusing before their beleeving The giving of the grace by God must needs goe before the having of it by men With like successe they quote Rom. 9. 25 and â— Pet. 2. 10 c. which haue no shew of ground whereon to build their assertion that God chuseth men actually and particularly because they beleev and repent but most firm foundation for the contrary truth Men become Gods people and beloved actually by actuall faith and repentance which before were his and beloved onely in the purpose of his will according to election Rom. 9. 11. 13 and elect according to Gods foreknowledge 1 Pet. 1. 2 God therefore actually chusing men and making them his people and beloved which are all one by giving them to beleev and repent their beleeving and repenting cannot goe before his chusing them but the contrary The giving of the gift is in nature before the having and using of it by him to whom it is given and therefore â—ods chusing them which is his giving them faith and repentance is before their beleeving and repenting The next place being Rom. 11. 5. 7 they set down craftily thus v. 5 If they seek righteousnesse by faith and these are thâ— the elect according to the election of grace The words of the Apostle are So then at this time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace and v. 7 the election hath obtained it and the rest were hardened The thing obtained was the righteousnesse of God and of faith the wedding garment the righteousnesse which Israel obtained not because they went about to stablish their own righteousnesse but the election obtained it by beleeving even that remnant wherof Paul was one according to the election of grace What can be more plain against these men Or how can any more directly crosse the Apostle then they doe The Apostle saith we obtain the righteousnesse of faith which is the wedding garment according to the election of grace They say we obtain the election of grace according to the wedding garment and righteousnesse of faith and obedience The Apostle saith the election obtains the righteousnesse of Christ by faith they say the righteousnes of Christ by faith obtains the election turning Gods work upside down that they may establish their own Besides this proud exaltation and Babylonish building of mens works against Gods grace for if it be of obedience as they say then of works to wit the works of obedience the Apostle v. 6 clean overturns saying If by grace then it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace but if it be of works then it is no more grace otherwise works is no more works In alledging from 2 Pet. 1. 10 that this election must be made sure they as before craftily conceal part of the Apostles words which being laid down as the Text hath them overthrow plainly their errour The words are Giue diligence to make your calling and election sure He joyns calling and election together they leav calling out And herein I commend them as the master did the unrighteous steward for doing wisely though not honestly For who knows not that Gods calling us goes before our answering him by faith and obedience as the cause therof God cals and also elects men to faith and obedience and not for them The Apostles meaning is that the faithfull should use all godly care for the establishing and confirming of themselvs in the grace of God to which they were formerly called and chosen The like prophane boldnesse they use towards 1 Thess. 1. 4 where for the Apostles text Knowing beloved your election of God or Knowing beloved of God your election they put their own glosse The houshold of faith the Church of God are the elect of God The Apostle v. 4 mentions his knowledg of their election and v. 5. 6 the ground of that his knowledg and perswasion which was their faith and obedience by receiving the Word by him preached They were not therefore made elect of God by faith and obedience but therby known for such by men Col. 3. 12 makes against them also where their election is mentioned as a reason to moue them to put on bowels of mercy and all goodnes As indeed the gracious purpose of Gods election with his effectuall calling followeth and manifestâ—th is the onely Evangelicall motiue to all earnest study of obedience Their assertion following that Election is not of particular persons but of qualities is monstrous and most crosse to the Scriptures which never mention election of qualities but alwaies of persons Is the meaning of Christ Math. 22. Many are called but few chosen that many qualities are called and few chosen What quality but of sin and misery sees the Lord in them whom he calleth Or how can qualities be either called or chosen to grace or glory Christ tels his Disciples that he had chosen them out of the world If they were chosen out of the world which lyeth in wickednesse and hates the good for what good qualities trow we were they chosen If they were chosen out of the world and so were of the world before they were chosen out of it how had they faith and obedience for which these men wil appoint God to chuse them or else not That we are Gods generation viz. by creation is true but impertinent Of â—ods working good qualities in men by his word and spirit and of their resisting or not resisting we haue spoken and shall speak else where Rom. 8 29 makes for them as the former places shewing plainly â— that our predestination or election goes before our calling our calling before our justification our justification before our glorification The note in the English Testament upon Ephes. 1 is the same which the Synode at Dort and all Evangelical Churches professe Onely these mens errour is in their not putting a difference between Gods decree to saue and his actual saving of them that beleev whether by justifying or glorifying them Gods chusing a man whether in decree from eternity or by actuall and effectuall calling and calling of him out of the state of
speak in the 9. 10. and 11. chapters Lastly we shall God willing make it appear in sundry particulars that these Adversaries by wresting of some things and omitting of others pervert the Apostles words to a strange sense how soever they think to get advantage by striking others first with that imputation And first though they account it plain and without difficulty that the Apostles meaning v. 5 6 is that not all the Israelits not all the children of Abrahams flesh specially not such as boasted of the observation of the Law were therefore in the state of salvation or should be saved yet in truth he plainly means another thing namely that all Israel all that were the seed of Abraham and children of the flesh were not that Israel that seed those children to whom the promise was made that is were not they touching whom God by his promise declared his purpose of election mentioned v. 11. For though all are saved that receiv the promise by faith and none by the works of the Law yet the Apostle in this place neither speaks a word of salvation as the effect of the promise but of election as the cause therof nor yet of mens receiving the promise by faith but of Gods making it according to election that so the purpose of God and promise manifesting it might stand according to election v. 11 that the word of God might take effect v. 6. even the word of promise At this time will I come c. v. 9 they are then called children of the promise not because they received but because the promise Sara shall haue a Son c. was made unto them according to the election of grace and stableness of Gods purpose v. 8. 9. 11 which promise also they did in time receiv by faith according to the election of that remnant from the rest the promise following the purpose of election and faith and salvation by it following the purpose and promise Though Israel that is all which were of Israel obtained not that which he seeketh for yet the election hath obtained it even the remnant of Israel to whom Gods promise is according to the election of grace in regard of which remnant according to election the word of God is effectuall and the promise fulfilled touching the yonger son of Rebeca of whose two sonns it was said before they were born or had done either good or evill the elder shall serv the yonger And as they truely affirm that neither birth nor works did prefer with God so I demand here what those works were by which Esau sought for justification The Scriptures expresly term him a prophane person that is a despiser of goodnes yea of his very birth-right which was a speciall legall priviledg How then sought he to be preferred with God and justified for birth or works Or how doth this example of Esau fit their imagined plain exposition specially to proue that the children of Abrahams flesh were not in the salvation who so much boasted of being Moses disciples in the observation of the Law when as the Law of Moses was not yet given nor the Law-giver born Their words following that God purposeth to prefer those that seek it by his free election through faith in Christ are true in themselvs but not in their sense Their meaning is that God purposed to saue them effectually that should beleev in Christ Iesus whereupon should be meant in this place onely such a purpose of God as was no more towards Iakob then towards Esau for God by their doctrine purposed to chuse Esau if he beleeved and not Iakob but upon his beleeving first But the Apostle speaks more then evidently of such a purpose of God as was towards Iakob particularly and alone excluding Esau. Besides the standing of this purpose and election are here noted as two distinct things of which election is the former and that according to which this purpose of God stands whereas they make them one and the same accounting election nothing but the purpose of bestowing salvation upon them that beleev Thirdly the Apostle cannot mean such a purpose and election as presupposeth faith in Christ which they would haue seeing he expresly affirms it to haue been when the children had done neither good nor evill Is to beleev in Christ to puâ— on the wedding garment by faith and obedience to submit to the righteousnesse of God which they will haue the condition upon vvhich election depends and the quality for which God elects the persons in whom he finds it are these to doe no good with with these men and is the doing of the contrary to doe no evill Lastly he saith not that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of vvorks but of faith as they say but not of vvorks but of him that calleth that is as followeth that vvill haue mercy on whom he vvill haue mercy By which it is plain that Paul doth not in this chapter as chap. 3. and 4 and Gal. 4 oppose works and faith but vvorks and Gods calling He should haue said for their purpose that the purpose of God stands not of works but of faith or of him that beleeveth and not as hee doth for the purpose of the Holy Ghost of him that calleth Shewing thereby his meaning to be in this whole discourse that the obtaining of righteousnesse or standing of Gods purpose in its actuall effect depends upon God alone according to three degrees here expressed first his gracious purpose of election in himselfe towards some secondly his free promise manifesting his purpose thirdly his effectuall calling in which his vvord of promise hath effect and his purpose stands firm and undisappointed notwithstanding the unbeleif of the body of Abrahams seed Their making Iakob and Esau types as they doe is like the rest or worse The Scriptures are not to be drawn from their natural simple sense without apparant warrant It is the high way to heresie to be bold in framing typical expositions And with what spirit these men are led this way appears by their expounding the parable Luk. 15 making the Iews the elder brother vvho sought salvation by vvorks and the Gentles the yonger in the offer of the Gospell seeking salvation onely by the free promise of God wheras the plain meaning of Christ is onely to avow his preaching to the Publicans and sinners resorting unto him against the pride and envy of the Pharisies those Publicans and sinners being Iews as well as the other Secondly I demand what it was in which Iakob typed out beleevers seeking righteousnesse by God and in which Esau typed out workers seeking justification by their own works The contrary in Esau is expressed in the Scriptures Lastly seeing it cannot be denyed but that Iakob as a faithfull and godly man was in time actually beloved of God and Esau as godlesse and prophane actually hated it must needs follow that God before the world was
A DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINE PROPOVNDED BY THE SYNODE AT DORT AGAINST IOHN MVRTON AND HIS ASSOCIATES IN A Treatise intuled A Description what God c. WITH THE REFVTATION OF their Answer to a Writing touching BAPTISM By IOHN ROBINSON Printed in the year 1624. THE PREFACE THE record which the Apostle bare the Iews in his time such as either reade these mens writings or know their persons may bear them which is that they haue a zeal of God but not according to knowledg I add touching them nor in modesty neither Which if it held any place in their hearts as were meet would moderate and restrain both their causlesse presumption in themselvs and gracelesse licentiousnesse which they fear not to use both towards God and other men They would seem very zealous for the Scriptures purity and perfection vvarning all to take heed they presume not aboue what is written nor to add to or diminish from the perfect law of the Lord contained therin And yet they themselvs presume so frequently and notoriously in this their book to corrupt the very words of the Texts which they cite by adding to and taking away and altering for their advantage as I suppose the like hath not been seen before in any of any sect whatsoever and as if in truth they meant not to use a gift to interpret the holy Scriptures but a priviledg to correct them A taste of this they giue us in their very Epistle where answering an objection taken from the learning of the Synode at Dort by Es. 29. 14 Math. 11. 25. 26 they instead of wise and prudent which are Christs words put learned and that in small letters as part of the Text both wronging therin that lawfull and helpfull learning in others which themselvs want and corrupting the Lords words which they ought religiously to keep and obtruding another meaning then ever came into his mind which they doe usually in this Treatise by neglecting the main scope of the place cited and catching at a word or phrase in it which is the highest way that can be to all heresie And for men how uncharitable are they towards them in their persons judging them as perishing without remedie if they receiv not their new Gospell of Anabatistry and Free-will How injurious in relating their own mis-formed collections for their opinions And lastly how contemptuous of their gifts and graces how eminent soever As if the word of God came out from them or to them alone It is true we ought not to pin our faith on the sleevs of any nor to call any Master as Christ speaks and means but him alone and no lesse true that Christ hath given gifts to some men for the edifying of others and that we ought not to look on our things alone as if we alone had knowledg and conscience and zeal and soules to saue but every man also of the things of others though in some things differing from them as having these things as well as we and therwith considering that many eies see more then one and that specially having as so many spectacles the advantages of knowledge of Tongues and Arts with daily travail in the Scripture which in us are wanting And thus serving God in all modesty of minde and being sincere in the truth in loue we shall be much sitter both to help others and to be helped by them in the things agreeable thereunto A DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINE PROPOVNDED BY THE SYNODE AT DORT CHAP. I. Of Predestination ADVERSARIES WEE hold that before the foundation of the world the most holy God predestinated to make the world and man c. DEFENCE NEither the Scriptures so speak neither is it sensibly said that God predestinated to make the world and man c. To predestinate is to predetermine or to destinate or ordain before hand a person or thing to its end God indeed purposed from eternity to make the world and man but destinated it and him considered as to be made to their ends Christ as God was preordained or predestinated before the foundation of the world and manifested in the last times for our redemption yet is he not of the number of persons or things made or created Again the glory of the grace of God shineing in mans salvation is a created thing and yet not predestinated of God nor preordained to any end being it selfe the utmost end of all things We see then something predestinated and yet not made and something again made and â—ot predestinated With like incongruity they adde that God predestinated to make man a reasonable soule to giue him a righteous Law and lastly to send his sonne to purchase the very wicked c. which last words haue neither truth in them in their meaning nor sense as they lay them down Secondly the Synode at Dort against which these Adversaries deal and all others speaking distinctly of things apply the decree of predestination to reasonable creatures and that Synode specially to men and the same considered as faln its Adam and thereby made guilty of eternall death referring the decree of creation and permission of the fall to a more general work of divine providence Their description of the elect and reprobate may be admitmitted in a good sense namely that the receiving of grace by some argues Gods eternall election of them as the effect doth the cause The not receiving of this grace by others to whom it is offered his eternall reprobation that is his not-electing but refusing or passing by of others as the consequent the antecedent Of which more hereafter In setting down the difference between them and us they insinuate as if we made God the Authour yea the principall Authour of all the evill of sin in the world But as the Synode disclaims that prophane errour so doth it justly complain of this ungodly slander which in these men ariseth from their want of skill to put difference between Gods working of the sinne as authour therof and his appointing and ordering both of sin and sinner to his own holy ends ADVERSARIES THe first particular against which they deal is our affirmation that God decreed the sinne of Adam and that of necessity to come to passe and consequently all other sinnes in their time taking upon them with all to manifest that herein wee not onely contradict the truth but our own affirmation elsewhere quoting for example Theses Genevenses pag. 26 where it is affirmed that Adam in innocency had free-will or power from the creation of God not to haue sinned which matter they also prosecute in many words with great disorder making the head of their discourse Predestination and the body sin DEFENCE AS the contradiction is not in our Assertions but in their misunderstanding So might I by good right forbeare to meddle about Adams sin in the case of predestination considering the determination of the Synode at Dort hereabout which I take upon
is frivolous The objection is of Gods will to harden men their answer is of Gods will to soften them by repentance ADVERSARIES HEre they lay against their Adversaries Gods friends two false accusations First that they make God hate Esau and Pharaoh and the Reprobates before they be born from which hatred he decreed their damnation and that by his secret will which cannot be resisted to which the will of God declared in the Scripture is contrary secondly that God compelled Pharaoh to trespasse and so to suffer DEFENCE BY the Law the false accuser must be done by as he would doe by his brother These mens slanders therefore being false are as odious in them as were the opinions odious in us if true First we know that God hates none before the world otherwise then they are and that they are no otherwise then in Gods decree and foreknowledge He hates none actually or by application of hatred till they haue actuall yea sinfull being but hates them before in decree onely as they are onely in decree and foreknowledge This decree of God we consider according to two objects Sin and Condemnation For sin we say that God decrees to suffer the sin which he could hinder by his almighty power if he would and to order both sin and sinner both before he sin and in sinning and having sinned to his own holy ends For damnation we hold that God decrees it towards none but for their sin by him infallibly foreseen and by them freely to be committed and continued in without repentance For though God be moved onely from within himselfe and the loue of his holinesse to decree the condemnation of a sinner yet doth lie not so decree to condemn him but for sin as the deserving cause foreseen and by him to be practised Neither yet doe either of these decrees passe forth from God for themselvs but both the one and the other for the glory of his power and justice to be made known to men and Angels v. 22. Neither is the secret and revealed will of God held by us contrary one unto another as they mis-judgâ— no not though he will that by the one called revealed which can be resisted and will not but will that by the other called secret which cannot be resisted I say though God will the same thing by the one which he nils by the other for some things God wils by both for example the repentance of Paul and Peter and of all that doe repent It is his revealed will which requires it but his secret and unknown will to giue it till he make it known by giving it Neither doth the willing and not willing no nor nilling which is more of the same thing make two contrary wils saue as they crosse one another in the same respect else they are but divers in respect of divers objects in consideration To open this a little further It was the revealed or commanding will of God that Pharaoh should let Israel goe but so it was not his secret or working will that is God did not so will this as that he would use his omnipotent power and doe what he could to bring it to passe God who turned the heart of Laban persecuting Iakob and of Saul persecuting the Christians and in whose hands are the hearts of Kings as the rivers of waters which hee turneth whethersoever hee wils could had it so pleased him by his irresistable power haue softned Pharaohs heart towards his people Israel It was Gods revealed will wherewith Moses acquainted him that he should let the people goe his secret will which he knew not till he felt the woefull effects of it to harden his heart for the declaration of his power in his deserved destruction So for Abrahams offering up his son Isaak it was Gods revealed will that he should offer him up for a burnt offering as is plain in that he commanded him so to doe v. 1. 2 yet withall it was Gods secret will that he should not offer him nor lay his hand upon him nor doe any thing unto him as he also revealed unto him in due time but purposed in himselfe before God being without variablenesse or shadow of turning and not to be conceived to haue changed his mind as vain man doth yet were not these two wils contrary one to another but divers not in God in whom all things are one even one God but in respect of divers objects and ends God willed Isaaks offering so far as the commanding will reached for the tryall of Abrahams faith and obedience and this he revealed But now God would not haue him offered in regard of the event of the thing but this as secret for the present and till God revealed it in its time Neither doe we or the Apostle whose steps we tread in by teaching that God hardens men by a will that cannot be resisted say as they ignorantly accuse us and him that God compels men to trespass and so to suffer There is no compulsion of any but of him that is unwilling but he that is hardned is willingly hardned as well as necessarily His hardning of himselfe in a course of sin is as voluntary as is Gods hardning him by way of punishment necessary and irresistible The Apostle teacheth how it is impossible for these who were once enlightned have tasted of the heavenly gift c. if they fall away to renue them again to or by repentance If it be impossible for them to repent then they remain impenitent necessarily by Gods just judgment upon them and yet I suppose voluntarily also even our adversaries being Iudges Their impenitency therefore and hardnesse of heart though in regard of men a sin and therefore voluntary it is in regard of God a punishment and therefore necessary and irresistable except we will say that men can resist Gods judgments and doe that which the Apostle affirmes to be impossible Neither needs this deep and divine mystery of Gods judgments trouble any that considers aright of these three things First that as the Sun puts no ill savour into the dung-hill though the stink therof be increased by its shining so neither doth God add any hardnesse or impenitency to any but onely leaves unrestrained occasions stirrs up and orders the corruption which he finds in men to this event Secondly that man is more willing to be impenitent and hard-hearted then God is to have him so Thirdly that this in regard of man is a sin in regard of God a punishment of former sins The Apostles answer to the objection now followeth v. 20. Nay but O man who art thou that disputest with God shall the thing formed say to him that formed it why hast thou made me thus Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor and another to dishonor Wherein first he represseth mans insolency who being but man yet dare presume to call Gods doing