And as many as were ordained to life or had acceptance with the King humbled themselves will you be so weak as to judge that their humbling was not before their choice though mentioned last in words when as 't is made a condition of their acceptance 1 Reas. Next you come to your Reasons in which you most unreasonably say That whatsoever comes to pass was before determined of God Oh impudence the height of blasphemie what every thing determined of God what if a man lieth with another mans wife or be drunk was that determined of God every thing was then these things were Oh! blush and be ashamed in maintaining such sordid opinions as these are 2. Reas. Secondly you say Whatsoever God doth for us in relation to heaven before Grace was wrought in us is done beforetime But Election or chusing of us is done for us before Grace is wrought in us Ergo The bold assumption of this foolish Syllogisme is most notoriously false being against the current of Scripture and those places you alledge for probation thereof do prove no more but that God loves us and hath given his Son to die for us even before we loved him and so he hath done for all But this is no chusing or Election such as you speak of from the rest but onely a general loving of all so as to endeavour their salvation by his Son Jesus Christ This shall be more fully cleered when I have done answering to your particulars when I come to speak of conditional Election made in intuition of our being in Christ and against irrespective decrees 2. Your second particular That God hath a special designe for the advancement of his grace and love to carry on by Christ for them and them onely is directly false and diametrally opposite to these Scriptures Mat. 9.13 Rom. 5.6 18 19. 2 Pet. 3.9 Ezek. 18.30 31 32. Chap. 33.11 and therefore I shall return no more answer to it his design being to work grace in all that he might save all though most will not receive grace and some receive it in vain 3. Your third particular being grounded upon the former false ones must of course be also false it self and so much for it 4. Your fourth particular That Gods designe was satisfaction for all sin and the purchase of eternal life c. If you mean he have purchased these things conditionally I assent to it and so he hath done for all But if you mean he hath done it for any other wayes then upon conditions performable by them then I deny it as most untrue according to the speech of our Saviour to his Disciples Matth. 6.14 If ye forgive not men neither will your heavenly father forgive you So that 't is to be noted that forgiveness is upon condition and also 't is to be noted that forgiveness and blotting out of sin is not properly in this life no other wayes then in a promise we may be said to be forgiven even as we may be said to be now saved see Act. 3.9 Sin being properly blotted out when there can be no more remembrance of it But now yet sin may be remembred against those righteous men that turn from their righteousness and all their righteousness shall be forgotten That which causeth you so plentifully to erre in your next particulars is your not understanding what Christ came to do you take it for granted I see that Christ came to do all the work for the Elect so that their sins are pardoned and they saved ipso facto and without any condition in them if that were true indeed that those he died for he had done so for them then his death indeed could not have been for all unless all should have been saved But 't is most evidently true That he hath not so died for any What the Father intended he should do by death that indeed he did finish and compleat viz. offer up himself a propitiatory sacrifice to God that he might open a way unto remission of sins and salvation for all but did effect it fully for none without themselves And because the greatest part of the errours of your book are founded upon this gross mistake I shall speak a few things more to it before I leave it although I have said enough already in a manner to a considering person first I will note wherein we differ in this point You hold that when Christ was offered upon the cross he took away put an end blotted out and utterly destroyed all his peoples sins for ever and presented them just righteous and holy before God now I for my part do distinguish between the cause and the effect between the time of the one and the time of the other but you jumble both together These things were done says your opinion whilst Christ was on the cross but I say they are indeed doing but are not compleatly finished till his second comming And now I will proceed to prove it which if I do not by plain and unwrested Scriptures then believe me not The first place is 1 Cor. 5.21 He hath made him that knew no Sin to be Sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in him This Scripture was wrritten by Paul after Christs death now note here he hath made him sin that we might be made righteous he hath been that we might be past in him and to come in us he is sin in us first we are righteousness of God in him afterwards his being sin for us is the cause our being righteousness is the effect A second proofe is Tit. 2.14 He gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purifie c. Note here also that Christs end in giving himself was that he might purifie and cleanse c. and we are cleansed but in part then his end is acomplished in part but when we are cleansed throughly then his end is wholly acomplished he shall first travel and afterwards shall see of the travel of his Soul Isa. 35.11 A third proofe is Col. 1.12 21. You that were enemies he hath reconciled in the Body of his flesh through death to make you holy unblameable and without fault in his sight from whence doth appear plainly 1 that Christs death was then past 2 that their spirits were in part reconciled then 3 that their being without spot was yet to come A fourth proofe Eph. 5.25 26.27 where note he gave himself for his Church that he might cleanse it with the washing of water by the word and that he might present it not having spot or wrinkle c. Minde it he gave himself that he might cleanse 2. cleanseth that he might present spotless c. First he in love gives himself second he cleanseth by his word third after clensing he presents it without spot or blemish but spotlesness is not before but at the appearing of Jesus Christ as you may see yet further in 1 Cor. 1.7 8. That ye may
be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ See also 1 Thess. 2.19 Act. 3.19 But unto all this 't is very like you will reply He hath taken Sin away already for the Elect and wholly blotted it out for these Reasons as some of you call them 1. Because he was ordained to take away sin 2. Because he is mighty to save 3. Because he took flesh upon him for this purpose 4. Because 't is Gods will that by blood-shedding he should sanctifie his I answer that though these are all truths yet they are not Reasons to the matter in hand for with what Reason will it appear that we are saved already because he is mighty to save or that sin is already done away because he came to take it away or that his people were perfectly sanctified as soon as ever his blood was spilt because that 't was Gods will his blood should sanctifie or that his people were spotless just when he died because he died that he might do it Reason tells me that things are not done while they are in doing Do you not know that presenting is after washing and washing after blood spilling Eph. 5.25 and is not his blood after 't is spilt sprinkled in our hearts to cleanse Heb. 10.22.1 Pet. 1.2 The blood of Christ which through the eternal Spirit hath been offered shall purge your consciences from dead works Heb. 9.14 his blood that is already spilt is still the blood of sprinkling which doth speak for us better things then the blood of Abel Heb. 12.24 I would fain know what Gospel your principle will admit to be preach'd to unbelievers since the death of Christ with what Reason can you say Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and ye shall be saved to such as saved are already or to say Repent that your sins may be blotted out Act. 3.19 to such whose sins are already blotted out or never shall be for say you The sins of the reprobate never shall but the sins of the Elect are already Also what reproof or dehortation against sin can you since the death of Christ give to those whose sins were utterly destroyed and done away at Christs death can they be took away and remain too no no this is against Reason when God hath compleatly cleansed his people they shall defile themselves no more at all See Ezek. 37.23 If yet any should stumble at this place We have redemption through his blood the forgiveness of Sins I answer I have already showen that we have it already in a promise and so we have it by faith but we have it not in accomplishment yet we yet walk by faith and not by sight 2 Cor. 5.7 But some of you yet further object That God hath promised his work should prosper Isa. 42 1â—4 55.11 I answer his work shall certainly prosper he hath purchased what he was to purchase and will accomplish what he is to accomplish but if the time when he died were the time not onely to purchase but also to effect an utter destruction to sin as you hold then his work hath not prospered for neither my sins nor yours are utterly destroyed as yet and truly if our sins should not be otherwise washt away then yet they are we should be in a sad condition and if Christ hath presented us before God already then hath he presented us faulty not faultless for if we say as yet That we have no sin we lie and truth is not in us 1 Joh. 1.8 There are Objections yet innumerable which I let pass onely answering one more somewhat material Object Christ would not answer the type if he did not quite take away sin For as Adam brought all in him under sin and condemnation So Christ hath made all in him righteous Rom. 5.12 So the priests are said To make atonement for the people and to cleanse them from all their sins before the Lord Levit. 16.30 So Christ hath presented all his without spot also So the peoples transgressions were lay'd on the Scape-goats head who carried them away Answ. First as none finned in Adam before they were in Adam so none are righteous before they are in Christ Likewise as we are in Adam by the first so are we in Christ by the second birth our first being in Christ is by faith See Phil. 3.8 9. Secondly we are in Adam before we are in Christ and so are sinners before we are righteous we cannot be cleansed till we are first unclean That is not first which is Spiritual but that which is Natural and afterwards that which is Spiritual 1 Cor. 15. But if men should be in Christ by Election before time as you weakly that I say not wickedly affirm then St. Paul had been in Christ as soon as any other but he directly saith that Andronicus and Junia his kinsmen were in Christ before him Rom. 16.7 To the second Type I Reply that the atonement was before cleansing for saith the place plainly The Priest shall make atonement for you to cleanse you that you may be clean from all your sins before the Lord Levit. 16.30 And not onely here but everywhere in the Law it will appear that first sin was committed Secondly Blood was spilt Thirdly sprinkled on the Sinner Fourthly after all this with other circumstances the parties were clean So likewise 1. We are sinners 2. Christs blood is spilt for an atonement 3. By faith 't is sprinkled on our hearts 4. After all this we are cleansed To the third Type I Reply That the peoples sins were lay'd on the scape-goats head after the slain-goat was slain and he carried them away after they were layed on his head apply this But I fear I have made too long digression and yet I thought it needful and so much shall serve for your four particulars now to the fifth 5. That faith which is required of all them that enjoy him is not a cause but an effect of Election This you say you will prove three wayes 1. from Scripture 2. From the nature of causes 3. From the nature of the thing First for your Argument Act. 13.48 I have already turned the point of it against your own brest And for the other places they prove no more but that God loves man before he loves God but they do not prove that God doth not love him more after he loves God then before I grant he loves all men first before they love him but when they love him again then he loves them with a greater love with a love of Election as shall be more fully manifested afterwards Secondly from the nature of causes your Argument is such a medly-mess of nonsence that I know not what to make on 't which you begin with a direct untruth in saying That you see I have drawn my Absurdities out of Hen. Haggars book when as I never saw it so I never heard of it till I read yours Thirdly from the nature of the thing Election
was never creature heard say Create me renew me O Lord Here one is heard crave Psal. 51. Create in me a clean heart O God and renew a right Spirit within me There it was never said to the Creature Make thy self Here 't is said Make you a new heart and a new spirit for why will you die Ezek. 18.31 Jer. 4.4 Ephes. 5.14 There was never any Creature blamed for not being made nor reproved for being as it is but Here to keep on the old man and not to put on the new is counted a notorious fault in them that profess Christ Jesus and the Gospel Do but consider these things and see if it be safe to compare the first Creation with the second for I conceive the mistaking of these things doth occasion many other absurdities in your self and others I finde nothing more until I come to your eighth particular page 74. but what hath been already answered enough You have indeed many particulars to prove that which I do not deny i.e. that the highest improvements of Nature without the help of Grace will not enable a man to convert or become a new creature what need all this do I say a man may convert without the help of grace But this indeed I say With the help of Grace men may but most do not Some refusing it others receiving it in vain Now I come to your eighth Position 8. That it is Gods minde and way and then of necessity in must be so for the advancement of his grace and the accomplishment of faith in the hearts of his own that this Gospel is to be presented or discovered unto all without exemption as to the declaration it self unto which you say you will say little the thing being so clear How now what a bold attempt do you make upon the wisdom and holiness of God what must the death of Christ and remission of sins for that 's the Gospel be preacht unto all for the sake onely of some If there be not really remission of sins for all men to be had in Christ then they which preach remission unto all as Christ commands his Apostles to do Luke 24.47 will be found to preach an untruth to most for the sake of some Alas for you these are low and base thoughts of God what do you judge the Almighty to have no better way to bring about his designs but by lies or by unreasonableness what if Gods design had been as you say 't is to work faith onely in some few and in them to work it certainly and unavoydably could not he thinke you have provided a better way to work this faith then by telling all men he would have them all repent believe and be saved c. telling them that he gave his Son to die for them all and is unwilling that any of them should perish Surely it would be a wilde trick and hypocritical if Mr. Hobson should send his servants to all the inhabitants in the Parts where he lives to invite them with great earnestness unto his feast and when they come there to put most of them back saying That he invited all onely for the sake of some and this he did for the magnifying of his grace would not any man think that either Mr. Hobson was distracted or else he was desperately full of guile and hypocrisie and such actions would magnifie his folly and wickedness not his grace Might not Mr. Hobson with less deceit and more honestie have sent some private and particular invitations to those particular persons he intended yea certainly he would if he were to make such invitations and I think he would scorne to invite all and intend onely some with what face then can he affirm that of the ever-blessed God which he hateth in man Surely God will not do that himself which he cannot indure and hath forbidden in man And whatever Mr. Hobson or any others say the Almighty will be found at the great day of account to have invited none but such as he heartily and really intended salvation unto had they been pleased to accept and not made light of it Matth. 22.5 In the next place you pretend to answer to this Objection Object If the power of believing be solely of God how can he justly condemn man for not believing seeing the power is not in them but in God I must needs tell you in plain English that your answer to this Objection is not onely impertinent but vile And while you devise new tricks and shifts to clear up the justice of God as you say you do absolutely deny the plain Scripture for say you page 77. God doth condemn no man for not expressing of a power to believe but for exercising a power to reject Christ when the Scripture saith He that believeth not is damned because he believeth not c. Joh. 3.18 and Christ saith unlesse ye believe that I am he ye shall dye in your sins But you say this is the declarative cause not the meritorious cause what a sordid saying is this what will God declare one cause and proceed by another Their not believing you say is the declarative cause but that is not the cause that God will go upon you say This is indeed according to what you have already said of him that he declares and proclaims one thing and means another I grant that God condemns men for rejecting grace so doth he also for not improving of that which they are possest withal Matth. 25.29 30. And he shall render vengeance not onely to those that rejected and did despite unto the Spirit of grace but also unto those that know not God and that have not obeyed the Gospel of Jesus Christ 2 Thess. 1.8 In the next place page 79 you pretend to discover my mistakes as you say which is the cause of my stumbling My first mistake you say is my measuring mans ability by Gods power or authority as when God saith Do this and you shall live c. this say you doth only imply Gods authority not mans ability I will shew you your weakness herein if you will but grant me that God doth all things wisely soberly and discreetly Judge now would it be soberly and wisely done for a King to say to an impotent man Do this impossible thing and I will reward you richly and if you do not I 'll hang you If no earthly King will command but where there is power to obey much more will not the King of heaven And if this were a way for a King to manifest his power by over his impotent Subjects yet would it be no way to magnifie his grace and favour towards them and that seems rather to be Gods design in the Gospel You must know and understand that God will and doth set forth his power and his justice in no other way then may well stand with the glory of his grace and mercy also 2. My second mistake you say is my not distinguishing
of causes and I say your mistake is the not understanding of causes I do allow of as many distinctions of causes as the Scripture doth but I am not so simple as to make several causes of one thing to be diametrially opposed against each other as ye do but consentaneous to one another so that Gods declared cause is adequate to his essential meritorious or final causes My third mstake as you say is my not understanding the extent of the word all and the word world and in this you make a great puther and a stir to prove that the word World is taken many times for lesse then all Who knows not that but 't is sometimes taken for all as you and all men confess and in this case touching the death of Christ I am certainly assured 't is meant all as I have already evinced from John 12.47 Nay moreover you grant it for you also affirm that he dyed for all and therefore when you except against my large extending the word world it may be conceived you are a little out of your self if not I am sure ye are out of the truth For what man that is compos mentis would first assert that Christ died for all and for the world and then except against the places that prove it as not extending unto all because sometimes those terms in other cases extend not to all I hope you will see your folly and be ashamed 4. My fourth mistake you say is my not understanding Ezek. 33.11 where the Lord saith As I live I delight not in the death of a sinner For from this place I conclude you say all sinners and so indeed I do yea the worst and perishing sinners and so the text saith expresly Ezek. 18 ult. I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth Who told you that God makes three sorts of sinners and one of them he calls sinners in a Gospel-sence have you eaten of the forbidden fruit if not how come you to know more then is written and more then is true that some sins and sinners are greater then others I do not deny but to divide sinners into so many sorts that exclude the greatest part of them from Gods desire of salvation to them I allow not but detest it as abominable I am sure God tells us no such thing in his word as that he would save onely sinners in a Gospel-sence But he either saith Sinners indefinitely or else particuliarly of such sinners as Mr. Hobsons wisdom excludeth as these Scriptures will abundantly testifie Jer. 25.3 unto 8. Jer. 35.12 unto 17. Chap. 29.19 Chap. 18.11 12 Chap. 6.16 17. Chap. 13.11 Isa. 48. 17 18 19. Where you may see he endeavoured with all earnestness even unto admiration to save not onely those that did accept but those also that refused Salvation and perished That all this was done out of true compassion to them doth appear 2 Chro. 36.14 15 16. That all this also was not a bare outward and helpless means which God used by his Prophets but a most efficacious powerful and prevailing means the Spirit of God going with the word of the Prophet and yet not received doth most manifestly appear in that remarkable place of Zechariah 7.11 12 13. as also Act. 7.51 This is yet farther confirmed and illustrated by the ever blessed Son of God in his most pathetical expressions of sorrow and grieffor and the shedding of tears over the miserable sons and daughters of Jerusalem who had unavoidably and full sore against his blessed will brought themselves into an irrecoverable estate by not knowing the time of their visitation when they were most gently allured and earnestly called upon it being now too late to reverse the Decree that was gone out against them I say yet did our Saviour weep for them Luke 19.41 and weeping he most affectionately breatheth forth this most blessed wish and desire for them O that thou hadst known in this thy day the things that belong to thy peace c. in which desire he is like unto God his father See Deut. 5.29 Chap. 32.29 Psal. 81.13 Isa. 48.18 Let all this be well weighed without prejudice and see then if you you cannot understand our Saviour as he speaks that is That he came not to call the righteous that is righteous indeed but sinners to repentance that is sinners indeed his designe into the world being more to amend that which was amiss to seek that that was lost and heal that that was sick then to those that were already in a good way and in a saveable condition that had not need of a Physitian Mat. 9.12 Mark 2.17 Whoever do but mark upon what occasion our Lord here speaketh these words they may with ease understand that he means worse sinners then Mr. Hobsons Gospel-sinners for our Saviour being at meat with Publicans and sinners in Levi's house the Scribes and Pharisees complain of it thinking 'tis like as Mr. Hobson doth that he was sent onely to the precise and Gospel-sinners which when our Lord perceived he said unto them They that are whole have not need of the Physitian but they that are sick I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance Next you say I mistake in putting one person for another as in Heb. 10.29 where the text saith Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy who hath troden under foot the Son of God and hath counted the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing c. Now you say my mistake is That I take the word he for the party that treads the blood of Christ under foot whenas 't is meant if all were true as you say of Christ himself that was sanctified This fond and I think your own interpretation of this place is not onely against all the judicious learned but against the scope of the Apostle which is both to aggravate the punishment and the sin of the person here spoken of who trampled under his foot the blood of Christ which he aggravates by rehearsing the vertue of it and what it had done for him to wit sanctified him from his sins which the party wickedly how slighted and rejected though formerly had imbraced it and been sanctified by it and this right well agreeth with Saint Peter 2 Pet. 1.9 2.20 21 22. I am still filled with amazement that you should be so void of reason as to interperet Scripture after such a heedless manner as to confront all wise and learned men yea and the truth also Do you think it would aggravate the sin of the sinner to tell him that he hath trampled under his foot that blood which he had no benefit nor sanctification by but that blood by which Christ was sanctified or do you think that Christ needed to be sanctified by his own blood himself I am well aware that sanctification is sometimes taken for setting apart but sanctification by Christs blood is never