transgression of some Law so every punishment is the revenge of some sin upon which it follows that if a mans sin is from himself 't is from himself that he is punisht And as the Law is not the Cause but the * Occasion only of sin so God is not the Cause but the inflicter only of punishment for so saies the Apostle Sin taking occasion by the Commandement wrought in me all manner of Concupiscence for without the Law sin was dead That which is good not being made death but sin working death by that which is good God and his Law are each of them the Causa sine qua non the Condition without which sin and punishment could not have been for without Law no sin without God no Reprobation but not the Energetical efficient Cause of which sin punishment were the necessary effects For if God had made a Hell by an absolute purpose meerly because he would that some should suffer it and not in a previous intuition of their sins Damnation had been a Misery but not a Punishment as if a Potter makes a vessel on purpose that he may break it which yet none but a mad man can be thought to do or if a man meerly for recreation cuts up Animals alive which yet none ever did that I can hear of except a young Spanish Prince it is an Infelicity and a torment but no more a punishment than it is any thing else Indeed the Common people who doe not understand the just propriety of words make no distinction many times betwixt Pain and Punishment not considering that Punishment is a relative word of which the correlative is breach of Law and therefore is fitly exprest in Scripture by the mutual relation betwixt a Parent and a Child when lu◠hath * conceived it bringeth forth sin sin being perfected bringeth forth death Iam. 1. 15. which is as much as to say according to the propriety of the Apostles words sin is the parent and death is the childe Now there cannot be a child without a parent for they are relata secundum esse much lesse can the child be before the parent for sunt simul natura dicuntur ad convertentiam Upon which it followes that punishment could not be ordained by God either without sin or before it or without respect and intuition of it which yet the great * Mr. Calvin does plainly say I say it could not because it implies a contradiction For though God could easily make Adam out of the earth and the earth out of nothing yet he could not make a sinful Cain to be the son of sinful Adam before there was an Adam much lesse before there was a sinful one because it were to be and not to be at the same time Adam would be a Cause before an entity which God Almighty cannot do because he is Almighty So that when the Romanists assert their Transubstantiation or the posterity of Marcion their Absolute decree of all the evil in the world both pretending a Reverence to Gods omnipotence they doe as good as say †those things which are true may therefore be false because they are true or that God is so * Almighty as to be able not to be God that being the Result of an Ability to make two parts of a contradiction true so said S. Austin against Faustus and Origen against Celsus Whensoever it is said God can do all things 't is meant of all things that become him So Isidore the Pelusiote But to return to that argument in the pursuit of which I have stept somewhat too forward if Gods preordination of mans eternal misery were in order of nature before his prescience of mans sin as Mr. Calvin evidently affirms in his Ideo * praesciverit quia decreto suo praeordinavit setting Praeordination as the Cause or Reason or praevious Requisite to his Praescience either mans Reprobation must come to passe without sin or else he must sin to bring it orderly to passe which is to make God the author either of misery by it self without relation to sin or else of sin in order to misery The first cannot be because God hath * sworn he hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner Ezek. 33. 14. much lesse in his death that never sinn'd And because if it were so the Scripture would not use the word Wages and the word Punishment and the word Retribution and the word Reward Hell indeed had been a torment but not a Recompence a fatal Misery but not a Mulct an act of power but not of vengeance which yet in many places is the stile that God speaks in Vengeance is mine and I will repay Rom. 12 19. Nor can the second be lesse impossible it having formerly been proved that God is not the Author of sin he hath no need of the sinful man whereby to bring mans Ruine the more conveniently about and most of them that dare say it are fain to say it in a Disguise Some indeed are for ligonem ligonem but the more modest blasphemers are glad to dresse it in cleaner phrase A strange {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Divinity to put the 1 child before the parent the 2 wages before the work the 3 end before the means the Reprobation before the sin yet so they do who make the Decree of Reprobation most irrespective and unconditional and after that say that whom God determines to the end he determines to the meanes To put the horse upon the Bridle is a more rational Hypallage For by this Divinity eternal punishment is imputed to Gods Antecedent will which is called the first and sin to his consequent will which is the second The first {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and the other only {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} punishment chiefly and sin by way of consecution Men are bid not to sin ex voluntate signi or revelata but are determin'd to it ex voluntate occulta or beneplaciti Distinctions very good when at first they were invented for better uses the former by S. Chrysostome from whom it was borrow'd by Damascene and from him by the Schoolmen But I say they all were used to very contrary purposes by them and by these who endeavour'd to repel those Fathers with their own weapons as the elaborate †Gerard Vossius does very largely make it appear I am sorry I must say what yet I must saith * Tertullian when it may tend to edification That the Lord God merciful and gracious long-suffering abundant in goodnesse and truth who is all Bowels and no gall who hateth nothing that he hath made who in the midst of Iudgement remembreth mercy ever forgiving iniquity transgression and sin is exhibited to the world by the Authors and Abetters of unconditional Reprobation as a kind of Platonick Lover of so excellent a Creature 's everlasting misery Which if
That God did not absolutely irrespectively unconditionally decree the everlasting misery of any one but in a foresight and intuition of their refusing his profer That he sent his Son to die for all the sins of the whole world inviting and commanding all men every where to repent and be forgiven Acts 17. 30. but that most like the slave in Exodus are in love with their bondage and will be bored through the ear That everlasting fire was prepared especially not for men but for the Devil and his Angels nor for them by a peremptory irrespective Decree but in praescience and respect of their pride and Apostasy That Christ came to save that which was lost and to call sinners to repentance and to have gather'd them as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings but they would not That God gave his law his rule his promises to all and excepted none in the publishing of either but so as he expected they should be willing as well as he for he would not save any whether they would or no That God Almighty made no man on purpose to torment him but that he might participate of his goodnesse * That so many as perish may thank themselves and that so many as live for ever are beholding to nothing but the grace of God That God decreed the fall of none but the raising up of those were down and that those very men who are reprobated had been predestin'd to salvation if they would have return'd and remain'd in truth and holinesse Gods Decrees being to many the cause of their rise but to none of their downfal Lastly that they who have despis'd the will of God wch did invite them to repentance shall feel the terrors of his will wch is to execute vengeance upon the children of Disobedience 20. From all this together which hath been said from Scripture from Reason from the authority of the Ancients who are the fittest of any to interpret Scripture I thus conclude within my self That God Almighty is the Author of men and Angels That wicked Angels and wicked men are the Authors of sin and that the sin of men and Angels is the Author of unexpressible and endlesse punishment That sin is rebellion against the Majesty of God that hell was made to punish Rebels and that God never decreed any rebellion against himself Upon which it follows that as I look for the cause of my election in the sole merits of my Redeemer so for the cause of my Reprobation in the obliquity of my will because the Reason of my punishment is to be taken from my sin and the Reason of my sin is to be taken from my self From whence there follows and follow it will do what I can a second Inference from my first compared with my first Principle viz. CHAP. III. 21. That every Reprobate is praedetermin'd to eternal punishment not by Gods irrespective but conditional Decree GOD doth punish no man under the notion of a Creature but under the notion of a Malefactor And because he does not create a malefactor but a man he hateth nothing that he hath created but in as much as it hath wilfully as it were uncreated his image in it So that no man is sinful because ordain'd to condemnation but ordain'd to condemnation because he is sinful Sin is foreseen and punishment is foreappointed but because that sin is the cause of punishment and that the cause is not after but before the effect in priority of nature though not of time it follows that the effect is not foreappointed untill the cause is foreseen So that God damns no man by an absolute decree that is to say without respect or intuition of sin but the praescience of the guilt is the motive and inducement to the determining of the Iudgement And yet however my second Inference is depending upon my first by an essential tye which gives it the force and intrinsick form of demonstration yet because some Readers will assent much sooner to a plain Reason lesse convincing than to a more convincing Reason lesse plain and that some are wrought upon by an argument exactly proportion'd to their capacities or tempers rightly levell'd and adopted more by luckiness than design whilest another argument is displeasing they know not why but that there is an odnesse in the look and meen which betokens something of subtilty and makes them suspect there is a serpent though they see not the Ambush in which it lurks I will gratifie such a Reader by a proof of this too first from Scripture then from Reason grounded upon Scripture and last of all by an addition to my former suffrages of Antiquity in which S. Austin more especially shall speak as plainly and as strongly in my behalf as any man that can be brib'd to be an Advocate or a witness 22. That my proof from Scripture may be the more effectual I shall first desire it may be considered that since God is affirmed to have a secret and a revealed will we must not preposterously interpret what we read of his revealed will by what we conjecture of his secret one for that were to go into the dark to judge of those Colours which are seen only by the light but we must either not conjecture at that which cannot be known as Gods secret will cannot be but by ceasing to be secret or if we needs will be so busie we must guesse at his secret will by what we know of his revealed one that so at least we may modestly and safely erre Upon which it follows that we who meekly confesse we have not been of Gods Counsel must onely judge of his eternal and impervestigable Decrees by what we find in his Word concerning his Promises and his Threats which are fitly called the Transcripts or Copies of his Decrees Such therefore as are his Threats such must needs be his Decrees because the one cannot praevaricate or evacuate the other but his Threats as well as Promises are all conditional therefore his Decrees must be so too Thus in his Covenant with Adam and indeed the word Covenant doth evince what I am speaking he threatens Death or decrees it not with that peremptory Reason which is the redoubling of the will onely I will therefore because I will but on supposition of his eating the forbidden fruit Which was not therefore forbidden that Adam might sin in the eating man was not so ensnared by the guide of his youth but Adam sinned in the eating because it had been forbidden Such immediately after was Gods language to Cain If thou do well thou shalt be accepted and if thou doest not well sin lyeth at the door Again saith God by the mouth of Moses Behold I set before you this Day a Blessing and a Curse A blessing if ye obey and a Curse if ye will not obey That is the form of making Covenants betwixt God and man every where throughout the Scripture and
and not as man for whilest he hath a will to hang the murderer he hath a merciful woulding to save the man He doth not hang the man but only because he is a murderer and if it lay in his power he would destroy the murderer to save the man Both the one and the other is not an absolute but a conditional will he would save the man with an if he were not a murderer and doth destroy the murderer with a because he is a Malefactor Just so Gods antecedent will is that every man would repent that they may not perish it is his consequent will that every one may perish who will not repent both the one and the other is respective and conditional Thirdly I distinguish with Prosper of an inviting and revenging will The inviting will is that by which all are bidden to the Wedding Feast his revenging will is that by which he punisheth those that will not come Or fourthly I distinguish with reverend Anselme of the will of Gods mercy and of the will of his Iustice It is the will of his Mercy that Christ should die for the sins of all but 't is the will of his Iustice that all should perish who come not in to him when they are called or who only so come as not to continue and persevere unto the end 41. All these distinctions come to one and the same purpose and being rightly understood as well as dexterously used doe seem to me a Gladius Delphicus sufficient to cut asunder the chiefest knots in this Question For the first will of God may be repealed whereas the second is immutable which is the ground of that Distinction betwixt the Threats and Promises under Gods Oath and those other under his Word only of which saith the Councel of Toledo Jurare Dei est a seipso ordinata nullatenus convellere poenitere vero eadem ordinata cum voluerit immutare When he is resolv'd to execute his purpose he is said to swear and when it pleaseth him to alter it he is said to repent for there are some decrees of God which being conditional do never come to passe as he thought to have done an Evil of punishment unto Israel which yet he did not Exod. 32. 14. And the reason of this is given us from that distinction before mentioned which also serveth to reconcile many seeming repugnances in Scripture For when it is said that God repenteth 1 Sam. 16. 35. it is meant of the first will and when it is said he cannot repent 1 Sam. 16. 29. it is meant of the second In respect of the first we are said to grieve to quench to resist the Spirit of God 1 Thess. 5. 19. but when it is said who hath resisted his will Rom. 9. 19. it is meant of the second God's Mercy is above and before his Iustice and therefore that is his first will that all should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth 1 Tim. 2. 4. but yet so as that his Iustice is not excluded by his Mercy and therefore that is his second will that so many should be damned as hated knowledge and did not chuse the fear of the Lord Prov. 1. 29. The will of his Mercy that all should live is from nothing but his goodnesse whereas the will of his Iustice that some should die depends upon something in the Creature So that both parties may be gratified they that are for the dependence and the independency of his Will That the Reprobate is invited is from the mercy of Gods Will but that he is punished for not accepting is from the obliquity of his own In respect of the first it is the man that refuseth God Ier. 8. 5. but in respect of the second it is God that doth reprobate man Rom. 1. 28. The free love of the Creator is the only motive to his first will but mans ingratitude and rebellion is his impellent to the second The first shews him a tender and compassionate Father the second speaks him a righteous and impartial Iudge both proclaim him a powerful and a provident God Now can any distinction be better chosen can any word that is aequivocal be more safely understood can any Opinion of Gods will or mans be more rationally or more warily or more religiously entertain'd than that wherein Gods Mercy doth greet his Iustice and wherein his Love doth kisse his Power I appeal to any man living whether this be an Error or if it is whether it is not a very safe one and if it is so whether it is not a very small one and if so safe that no body can suffer by it if so small that no body can see it whether the Author of this Appeal is not very excusable both for not being able to see his own Eyes nor to see his own Errour with other mens As much as in me lies I would live peaceably with all men with those especially who when I speak unto them thereof make them ready to battel And in order to that Peace I desire them to lay this one thing to heart that as if I were as they I would quit my Opinion so if they were as I they would not long keep their own CHAP IV. Free and special Grace defended against the Pelagians and Massilians in the second Principle proposed 42. HAving proved hitherto that Sin is really the cause of Punishment that Man is really the cause of sin and therefore that Man is the grand cause of Punishment as being the cause of the cause of his Damnation intending thereby to secure my self against the errours and blacker guilt of the Manichees the Marcionites the Stoicks and the Turks who do all affirm some directly some by necessary consequence That Gods absolute Will is the cause of sin and mans onely the instrument the second part of my Task is to be an Advocate for the pleading and asserting the Cause of God too and that against the Opiners of the other Extream to wit the Pelagians and the Massilienses who to be liberal to Nature do take away from Grace and to strengthen the Handmaid do lessen the forces of the Mistress And though I think the later to be the milder Heresie of the two it being lesse dangerous to ascribe too much goodness to the Power of Nature which very power is undoubtedly the gift of God than the very least evil to the God of all Grace and this according to the judgement of the Synod at Orange which pronounced an Anathema upon the first Heresie whereas it did but civilly reject the second yet in a perfect dislike and rejection of this later extremity aswell as of the former my second Principle is this That all the good which I do I do first receive not from any thing in my self but from the special Grace and Favour of Almighty God who freely worketh in me both to will and to do of his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. 43.
Presbytery should invent strange slanders against the innocent then that a man of the Church of England should proceed to conviction against the guilty It will appear to all Readers from the first to the last of these following Tracts that my principal intention hath been to vindicate my God both in his Essence and in his Attributes from the publick calumnies of evil doers whilest one doth teach that God willeth sin and another that he ordaines it and a third that it is one of Gods works the desperate sinner is taught to say I have done the will of God and what God appointed me to do 2. Whilest some affirm that Gods willing of sin doth make it cease to be a sin and others say he willeth all sins a third sort conclude that there are no sins at all 3. Whilest they say with eagerness that God must be such or there is no God at all they teach as many to be Atheists as cannot believe with the Libertines that God doth will and work sin 4. Whilest they say that the Regenerate cannot possibly fall away nor become notoriously ungodly by their commission of Crimson and Scarlet sins they teach the Ranters to live accordingly I can name the persons who have taught such things and experience hath taught us what they are who have reduced their knowledge of the several Lessons into Practice Towards the remedying of this I have in singleness of heart considered what should be the cause and as God hath enabled me us'd my endeavours to remove it I have been most of all intent upon clearing the Holiness of God that men may think of him with Reverence and Love unfeigned A wrong apprehension of the Deity is apt to breed a wrong worship and so I have pitch't upon the subject wherein it primely concerns us to set men right The holiness of God is his Soveraign Attribute and dearer to him then his power The Cherubims and Seraphims do continuaily cry out in honour to him Not high and mighty and unresistible but Holy Holy Holy Lord God of Hosts As if God esteemed more of this then of all his Attributes besides And Bishop Andrews of precious memory thought fit to make it his observation that in God Holy Holy is before Lord of Hosts His Holiness first his Power after May all that hate me upon the earth but follow the method of the Angels which are in Heaven speaking so honourably of God to a peevish world as not to miss of his favour in the word to come I shall not fail of their Love and shall receive the best recompence for all my Labour Fiat Fiat THO. PIERCE Directions for the placing of the ensuing Tracts I. The Correct Copy of Notes II. The Divine Philanthropie defended III. The Divine Purity defended in answer to Dr. Reynolds IV. The Self-Revenger exemplified in Mr. B. V. Self-Condemnation exemplified in Mr. W. and others A brief Table to the five ensuing Tracts immediately to follow the General Preface I. In the Correct Copie Two General Principles 1. That no moral evil is from the evil of God but of the Creature p. 6. 11. 2. That all good is from the free grace of God p. 6. 55. The distinction of Gods secret and revealed will as contrary to one another blasphemous p. 12. God permits sin only so as not to hinder it by sorce p. 15. Man is the sole efficient cause of his own destruction p. 17. Absolute Reprobation contrary to all the antient Fathers p. 25. 45. Even to S. Aug. p. 28. 44. The judgment of the Church of England p. 29. Gods Decree of Reprobation is not irrespective but conditional p. 32. Knowledge and Fore-knowledge in God p. 48. Gods Antecedent and Consequent will p. 51. All good is from Gods free Grace p. 56. Gods free Grace doth not destroy mans Free-will p. 57. Irresistible Grace not reconcileable with Choise p. 59. Distinction between Infallible and Necessary p. 61. Sufficient Effectual and Irresistible Grace p. 61. Taking and Chusing p. 62. Voluntary and Spontaneous p. 64. Gods Grace the Cause of Good Mans will the Instrument of Choise p. 63. Gods Decree of Election Conditional and Respective p. 68. II. In the Divine Philanthropie defended Post-destination p. 4. Eternal Praedestination Receptive p. 7. Pelagianisme p. 8. Arminius and Arminianisme p. 12. chap. iv p. 35. The judgment of the Church of England p. 19. Literal and Figurative Interpretations of Scripture p. 21. ch. iv p. 47. Absolute and Conditional will of God p. 56. Faith not the Cause but the Condition of Election p. 63. Negative and positive Reprobation p. 65. ch. iv p. 4. Hell prepared for Devils not for Men p. 70. Special Grace p. 83. and Redemption p. 84. Christ died not only for the Elect p. 85. Christ died for all not only sufficienter but intentionaliter p. 93. Grace of Perseverance p. 101. chap. iv p. 17. not irresistible p. 102. Vniversal Tradition p. 105. The cause of Punishment eternal p. 108. 117. The cause of sin not Deficient but Efficient p. 113. Gods permission of sin p. 129. 139. Gods Decrees Absolute Conditional chap. iv p. 1. Praeterition p. 4. Fundamentals p. 10. Synod at Dort p. 13. Gods Soveraignty and Justice p. 20. Plea for Infants p. 25. Vniversal Redemption p. 28. Esficacious Permission p. 33. Act and Sinsull Act p. 43. Twofold command of God p. 52. God hath not two contrary wills p. 57. III. In the Divine Purity Defended The Judgment of King James p. 6. Making God the Cause of Sin is blasphemy in the judgment of the Antients p. 22. and Modern learned men p. 26. even the Calvinists p. 30. Gods hardening Mens hearts p. 66. Gods Allmightiness p. 81. Gods way of working on the will p. 92. Free grace not unconditional p. 112. IV. In the Selfe-Revenger Abuse of the Tongue p. 1. Selfe-deceiving p. 2. Adams Sin p. 22. Original Sin p. 23. Born in Sin p. 24. Innocency p. 32. Christian Perfection p. 35. Excommunicating and Murthering Kings p. 77. Dangerous effects of Presbyterian Discipline p. 80. Vniversal and special Grace p. 87. Grotius his temper and Designe p. 92. Episcopacy and Liturgy approved by Calvin p. 95. Rigor of Presbytery advances Popery p. 98. In the Appendage Vniversal Grace and Vniversal Redemption p. 128. Extent and Intent of Christs death p. 138 142. Application of it p. 145. V. In Selfe-Condemnation Irrespective Decrees founded in the mistake of Gods Prescience Introd p. 3. Conditional Decrees p. 15. Order of Time and Order of Nature p. 20. Gods Promise Conditional p. 28. Gods glory not advanced by irrespective Reprobation ch. 1. p. 3. Act and obliquity of the Act p. 11. Efficacious permission p. 22. Hebraisme p. 39. Actions Natural and Vnnatural p. 72. 77. 81. Sin and the sinfull Action inseparable p. 84. Sin makes not for Gods glory p. 87. The Nature of Knowledge and Degree p. 122. Foreknowledge p. 123. doth not necessitate p. 126. nor presuppose
adigit cogit compellit He makes us willing who are unwilling but does not force us to be willing whilest we are un willing that is to say to be willing against our wils or whether we will or no 12. But I find that I have shot somewhat farther then I aimed it being onely my design and the proper business of this place to shew that the words of the Apostle he worketh all things are infinitely far from being meant either of sin or Reprobation So far from that that God Almighty does not permit sin as permission signifies connivence or consent but he permits it as that signifies not to hinder by main force If I see a man stealing and say nothing to him I so permit as to be guilty but if I warn and exhort if I promise and threaten and do all that may avert him besides killing him I so permit as to be innocent In like manner all that is done by God Almighty by way of permission is his suffering us to live and have that nature of the will with which he made us Whereas to destroy us for the prevention of sin or to make us become stocks as Beza phrases it or like wooden Engines which are moved only by wires at the meer pleasure discretion of the Engineer were by inevitable consequence to * uncreate his creature which to do were repugnant to his immutability as Tertul. shews This is all that I am able to apprehend or pronounce that God permits our sins in this sense onely and that he disposes and orders them to the best advantage 13. Having proved my first Principle by Scripture and Reason it will be as easie to confirm it by the common suffrage of Antiquity and to avoid the repetition of so long a Catalogue which I suppose will be as needlesse as I am sure it will be nauseous to a considerable Reader I REFER him to the CITATIONS which will FOLLOW my FIRST INFERENCE SECT. 18. I will content my self at present to shut up all with a that Article of the Augustan Confession to which our 39. Articles have the greatest regard and conformity and which for that very reason is to me the most venerable of any Protestant Confession except our own That though God is the Creator and Preserver of Nature yet the only cause of sin is the will of the wicked that is to say of the Devil and ungodly men turning it self from God to other things against the will and commandements of God b And the Orange Synod doth pronounce an Anathema upon all that think otherwise If any will not subscribe to this Confession I will leave him to learn modesty both from Arrian the Heathen and from Philo the Iew {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Arrian in Epictet {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Philo {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} p. 325. CHAP. II. 14. MY first Demand being fully granted as in the Mathematicks 't is usual to build upon certain Postulata it doth immediately follow that Man himself is the sole efficient cause of his eternal punishment I say the sole Cause as excluding God but not the Devil whom yet I also exclude from the efficiency of the Cause because he can onely incite and propose objects and adde perswasions to sin but cannot force or cause it in me without my will and consent so that the Devil being onely a Tempter and Perswader cannot for that be justly stiled an efficient Or if he were sure for that very Reason God himself cannot be so but onely Man and the Devil must be the Concauses of mans destruction Which is the second thing I am to prove both by Scripture and Reason and the whole suffrage of Antiquity 15. And here I shall not be so solicitous as to rifle my Concordance but make use of such Scriptures as lye uppermost in my memory and so are readiest to meet my pen These I find are of two sorts negative on Gods part and affirmative on mans God gives the first under his oath Ezek. 33. 11. As I live saith the Lord I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked but that the wicked turn from his way and live turn ye turn ye from your wicked waies for why will you die O house of Israel In the 18. ch. of the same Prophesie the Latine translation is more emphatical than the English for there it is not non cupio but nolo mortem morientis noâ— that he doth not will the death of a sinner but that he wils it not he doth not only not desire it but which makes the proof more forcible he desires the contrary even that he should turn from his wickednesse and live chapter 33. vers. 14. not willing saith S. Peter that any should perish but on the contrary that all should come to Repentance And so 1 Tim. 2. 4. He will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth Where it appears by the Context that the Apostle does not onely speak of all kindes of particulars but of all particulars of the kindes too For he first of all exhorts them that prayers and supplications and giving of thankes be made for all men verse 1. secondly he does instance in one sort of men for Kings and all that are in Authority verse 2. thirdly he addes the Cause of his exhortation for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour who will have all men to be saved verse 3 4. And if the Spanish Friar said true that few Kings go to Hell giving this reason because all Kings are but few the Apostles way of arguing will be so much the stronger for when he speaks of all men in general he makes his instance in Kings in all Kings without exception thereby intimating Nero the worst of Kings under whom at that time the Apostle lived And he uses another argument verse 6. because Christ gave himself a Ransome for all This is yet more plain from Rom. 2. 4 5. Despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thy self wrath against the day of wrath Observe who they are whom God would have to repent even the hard-hearted and the impenitent But I have stronger proofs out of Scripture and lesse liable to cavil than any of these which yet I thought fit to use because I find they are the chief of those that Vossius relies upon and expounds to my purpose from the Authority of the Ancients I will adde to these but three or four Texts more of which the one will so establish and explain the other as to leave no place of evasion to the gainsayer First our blessed Saviour is called by the Apostle the Saviour of all men especially of them that believe 1 Tim. 4. 10. As if
the Apostle had foreseen an objection that the word all might be restrained unto the houshold of Faith he prevents it by a distinction of general and special For if he is a special Saviour of believers he is a general Saviour of those that are unbelievers not that unbelievers can be saved whilest they are obstinate unbelievers but upon condition they will repent and believe else why should the Apostle affirm the Saviour to be of all and then come off with an especially to them that believe Certainly if it is every mans duty to believe in Christ Christ dyed for every man And this very argument is not easily answered in the very confession of Dr. Twisse who yet by and by saies 't is easily answered and yet he leaves it without an answer he only scornes it and lets it passe Twiss. in Respon. ad Armin. Praefat. p. 16. col 2. This is secondly confirm'd from the Apostle's way of arguing 2 Cor. 5. 14. If one died for all then were all dead This is the major Proposition of an hypothetical syllogisme in which the thing to be proved is that all were dead and the Medium to prove it is that one dyed for all Now every man knows that understands how to reason that the argument of proof must be rather more than lesse known than the thing in question to be proved so that if it be clear that all men were dead by the fall of the first Adam it must be clearer as St. Paul argues that life was offered unto all by the death of the second Adam and if none were dyed for but the Elect then the Elect only were dead for the word all must signifie as amply in the Assumption as it does in the Sequel or else the Reasoning will be fallacious and imperfect The Apostle thus argues If one dyed for all then were all dead But one dyed for all that must be the Assumption Therefore all were dead Whosoever here denies the Minor does before he is aware condemn the Sequel of the Major and so gives the Lie to the very words of the Text which I can look for from none but some impure Helvidius who would conclude the greatest falsehoods from the word of Truth This is thirdly confirmed from the saying of the Apostle Rom. 11. 32. that God concluded all in unbelief the Gentiles first verse 30. and afterwards the Iewes verse 31. that he might have mercy upon all From whence I inferre that if this last all belong to none but the Elect then none but the Elect were concluded in unbelief But it is plain that all without exception were first or last concluded in unbelief therefore the mercy was meant to all without exception Lastly it is confirm'd from those false Prophets and false Teachers 2 Pet. 2. 1. who though privily bringing in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them and bringing upon themselves swift destruction yet it seems they were such whom the Lord had bought So far is God from being the Cause of mans destruction by an absolute irrespective unconditional Decree that he gave himself a ransome even for them that perish They were not left out of the bargain which was made with his Iustice but the Apostle tels us they were actually bought He whose blood was sufficient for a thousand worlds would not grudge its extent to the major part of but one He was merciful to all men but the greatest part of men are unmerciful to themselves He is the Saviour of all but yet all are not saved because he only offers does not obtrude himself upon us He * offers himself to all but most refuse to receive him He will have no man to perish but repent by his Antecedent will but by his Consequent will he will have every man perish that is impenitent Which is sufficient to have been said for the negative part of my undertaking That the cause of Damnation is not on God's part in which if any one Text be found of power to convince let no man cavil at those others which seem lesse convincing If any one hath an objection let him stay for an answer till his objection is urged It might seem too easie to solve objections of my own choice or confute an argument of my own making and therefore I passe without notice of common shifts and subterfuges till I am call'd to that Drudgery to the second part of my enterprise which is the affirmative 16. That man himself is the cause of his eternal punishment Which though supposed in the negative must yet be proved to some persons who are prevailed upon by fashions and modes of speech and will deny that very thing when they see it in one colour which they will presently assent to when they behold it in another He who is very loth to say that God is the Author of sin and damnation will many times say it in other termes and therefore in other terms it must be proved that he is not O Israel thou hast destroyed thy self but in me is thine help Hosea 13. 6. They that privily bring in Damnable Heresies shall bring upon themselves swift destruction The foolishness of man perverteth his way And as when lust conceiveth it bringeth forth sin so when sin is finished it bringeth forth death Iam. 1. 15. If death is that monster of which sin is the Dam that brings it forth how foul a thing must be the Sire and can there be any greater blasphemy than to bring God's Providence into the pedigree of Death Death saith the Apostle is the wages of sin Rom. 6. 23. and wages is not an absolute but a relative word It is but reason he should be paid it who hath dearly earn'd it by his work It is the will of man that is the servant of sin Disobedience is the work Death eternal is the wages and the Devil is the pay-master who as he sets men to work to the dishonour of their Creator so he paies them their wages to the advancement of his glory From whence I conclude with the Book of Wisdome God made not death neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living for he created all things that they might have their being and the generations of the world were healthful and there is no poyson of Destruction in them nor the kingdome of death upon the earth But ungodly men with their words and works call'd it to them and made a covenant with it because they are worthy to take {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} part with it 17. I will confirm this truth by no more than one Reason which if it is not the best doth seem to me to be the fittest as being aptest to evince both the connexion and necessity of my first inference from my first Principle It is taken from the nature and use of punishment which as soon as it is named doth presuppose a Guilt for as every sin is the *
for the first was not destroyed and the second did not die at that determinate time when God had threatned they should Of which no reason can be given but that Gods Purposes and Decrees Threats were conditional on supposition of their Impenitence he threatned to destroy and therefore on sight of their Repentance he promis'd to preserve And from hence it is natural to argue thus Is God so merciful to bodies and is he lesse merciful to souls Does he decree temporal Iudgements conditionally because he is pitiful and will he decree eternal ones absolutely meerly because he will Is he so unwilling to inflict the first death and will he shew his power his absolute power in the second Did he spare the Ninevites in this life because they were penitent and will he damn them in the next because they were Heathens by his peremptory Decree Is he milde in small things severe in the greatest Is there no other way to understand those Texts in the 9. to the Romans than by making those Texts which sound severely to clash against those that sound compassionately Is it not a more sober a more reasonable Course to interpret hard and doubtfull Texts by a far greater number more clear and easie than perversly to interpret a clear Text by a doubtfull one or an easie Text by one that 's difficult which is to shew the light by the darknesse Or if some Texts have two senses if some Texts are liable to many more must we needs take them in the worst and that in meer contradiction to the universall Church If I had no other argument against an absolute Reprobation this one were sufficient to prevail with me That that Father of mercies and God of all consolation who spareth when we deserve punishment did not determine us to punishment without any respect to our indeservings He that had mercy upon wicked Ahab meerly because of his Attrition did not absolutely damn him before he had done either good or evill before the foundations of the world were laid He doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men Lam. 3. 33. much lesse doth he damn them for his meer will and pleasure When God doth execute a temporall punishment upon such as already have deserv'd it he comes to it with reluctation {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and therefore calls it his * strange work a work he loves not to be acquainted with a work which he doth sometimes execute because he is Iust but still * unwillingly because he is compassionate And he therefore so expresses it as we are wont to do a thing we are not us'd to and know not how to set about How shall I give thee up Ephraim how shall I deliver thee Israel how shall I make thee as Admah how shall I set thee as Zeboim Mine heart is turn'd within me my repentings are kindled together I will not execute the fiercenesse of mine anger for I am God and not man Now that God doth professe to afflict unwillingly and many times to repent him of the evill which he thought to do unto his people is a demonstrative argument of his Conditionall decrees in things Temporall by a greater force of Reason in things Eternall 30. My eighth Reason is taken from the little flock which belongs to God and the numerous herd which belongs to Belial which would not have been if they had both been measur'd out by a most absolute Decree For when it pleas'd the Divine goodnesse to suffer death upon the Crosse for all the sins of the world the every drop of whose blood had been sufficiently precious to have purchased the Redemption of ten thousand Adams and ten thousand worlds of his posterity he would not yield the major part unto his Rival Rebel the black prince of darknesse reserving to himself the far lesser portion and all this irrespectively meerly because he would He would not absolutely determine such a general harvest of wheat and tares as freely to yield the Devil the greater crop He would not suffer his Iustice so to triumph over his Mercy who loves that his Mercy should rejoyce against Iudgement It was not for want of a new Instance to shew his Power or his Iustice for they were both most eminent in the great Mystery of Redemption Much greater instances and arguments than an absolute Decree as I could evidently shew if I were but sure of my Readers patience My ninth Reason is taken from the Reprobation of Angels which was not irrespective but in regard to their Apostasie as is and must be confessed by all who place the object of Reprobation in massa corrupta For the overthrowing of which tenent in all the Sublapsarians Dr. Twisse himself does thus argue Si Deus non potuit Angelos reprobare nisi ut contumaces ergo nec homines nisi ut in contumacia perseverantes De Praedest Digres 4. Sect. 4. c. 2. 31. My tenth Reason is taken from the absurdities which have and still must follow if Gods eternal decree of mans misery is not conditional but absolute And those absurdities are discernable by this following Dilemma Let Dives be suppos'd to be the man that is damn'd It is either because he sins or meerly because God will have it so If for the first Reason because he sins then sin is the cause of his damnation and consequently before it From whence it follows that Dives is not damn'd meerly because God will have it so but that God will have it so because he sins Which plainly shews the conditional Decree But if it be said that it is for the second Reason meerly because God will have it so then that absolute Decree to have it so doth either necessitate him to sin damnably or it does not First if it does then how can Dives be guilty of that thing of which Gods absolute Decree is the peremptory Cause Or how can that be guilt which is necessity Dives could as little have cherisht Lazarus as the Tower of Siloe could have spared the Galileans if his will had been no more free than that Tower had a will And secondly if it does not necessitate him to sin damnably then Dives who is damn'd might possibly have not been damn'd From whence it follows that Dives is not damn'd absolutely but in regard to his sins Which had they not been his choice they had not been his but his that did chuse them And it is a contradiction to say a man chuses any thing without a free will or by an absolute necessity which is whether he will or no Besides if God did absolutely decree the end which is damnation and consequently the means which is final impenitence these Absurdities would follow First it would be a Reprobates duty to be damn'd And to endeavour his salvation would be a sin because it were striving against the stream of Gods absolute Will If all men are to