to soften and change the heart as farre as in repentance sticktly taken is required It is true Repentance is a change oâ— the heart for in repentance the heart 〈◊〉 changed first in the affection of ioy 〈◊〉 sorrow for whereas a sinner before his repentance reioyced in doing euill now he sorrowes for the euill hee hath done Sâ—condly in the purpose of doing for wherâ— as formerly he purposed to liue in his siâ— Now he purposeth to leaue them but thiâ— change of the heart may be wrought before faith in Christ as well as the changâ— of the minde from darknesse to light 〈◊〉 wrought before it Acts 26 18. and the change may bâ— true in the one that is the heart as well aâ— in the other that is the minde Indeede the beginning of the changâ— of the heart doth presuppose that faitâ— which is a beleefe of threatnings to thâ— impenitent and promises to the repeâ—tant which comprehends a beleefe of thâ— truth of the death and resurrection 〈◊〉 Christ and in the elect the beginning 〈◊〉 this change of the heart doth suppose thâ— faith in Christs death and resurrection wâ— follow for the perfecting of it in mortifâ—cation and viuification But it is not truâ— that the beginning of this change doth pâ— suppose this faith as present at the very iâ—staÌ„nt wheÌ„ this change is a beginning whicâ— is the question and which is not proue by this Argument and therefore it proues nothing the third followes The Exception If a man can neuer beginne to returne till he beleeue that God will bee mercifull to him in speciall The third argument then repentance is not begunne in time before a sauing faith But the first is true therefore the second The Apology The consequence is naught 1. because it takes for granted which I deny that a beleefe that God will be mercifull to a man in speciall that is in particular to Iohn and William is a sauing faith This is false 1. because this is but an assent to the truth of a proposition such a beleefe is but an Historicall faith and such a faith is not a sauing faith 2. because such an assent cannot be faith because it doth not rest vpon the authority of God reuealing it in Scripture for hee hath reuealeth no such thing touching the saluation of any particular man but generally to all but vpon this beleeuing in Christ Indeede it is reuealed that God will be mercifull in generall to mankinde and in speciall to those of mankind which beleeue in Christ so that till they beleeue in Christ they may not beleeue or perswade themselues that God will be mercifull to them in speciall Before sinners doe beleeue in Christ they may beleeue and perswade themselues it is possible for God to haue mercy on them and that God will certainely be mercifull to them when they repent and beleeue in Christ but before this they may not For though exhortations to repentance are founded commonly vpoâ— the mercy of God in the Gospell yet noâ— vpon the Mercy of God already receiueâ— by iustifying faith but offered by God and to be receiued vpon Repentance anâ— faith in Christ for the conditions must be performed before we may expect the accomplishing of the promise and we musâ— feele in our selues by the reflexe of our owâ— conscience that we do indeede hartily sorrow for our past sins and purpose vnfeinedly to leaue them before we may rest oâ— Christ or trust to him for saluation foâ— till then wee are not persons well qualified to receiue mercy nor fit to trusâ— in him for it so as to bee sure to obtaine it certainely in the end for though the Scripture say Repent for the Kingdome of Heauen is at hand yet doth it not say repent for yee are all ready in the Kingdom of Heauen by a iustifying faith Secondly the consequence is naught because it prooues no more but that repentance is not begunne till faith in Christ and not that it is nor begun in time before it for betwixt these two propositions there is great difference as hath bin wel obserued by them in their answer to my 3 argument The Assumption likewise is not true 1. because a man may beginne to returne by illumination for that is a turning of men from darkenesse to light except they neede not repent of their ignorance and infidelity 2. Acts. 26 18. because a man may begin to returne by a beleefe of that word that threatens the impenitent and for feare of punishment he may also proceede further herein by a beleefe of that word which promiseth mercy to the repentant and in hope of pardon but a man must beginne to returne before he beleeue that God will be mercifull to him in speciall or else hee will neuer begin to returne because there is no such speciall promise in the word to be beleeued as may appeare by this reason The beleefe that God will be mercifull to a man in speciall must be either absolute or conditionall Absolute it cannot be because no man can beleeue in this manner absolutely but he to whom such mercy is absolutely promised Now in the word there is mercy promised to none but vnder the condition of repentance and faith in Christ nor is this mercy promised in speciall and particular but in generall to all mankind viz. which beleeue in Christ If it be not absolute then is it condâ—tionall if conditionall then may not a sinner beleeue that God will be mercifull to him in speciall till he haue performed the condition And therefore for all this their third reason is weake and sinners may beginne to repent in time before they beleeue in Christ The Exception The fourth argument There is a fourth reason alledged to disproone my supposed position of repenting some space of time before beleeuing in Christ viz. because I say page 231 301. 303. that the practise of repentance followes faith meaning in time The Apology This reason is not worth the framing or answering for it answeres it selfe Hee that speakes of the practise of Repentance following faith and thereby meanes the actuall performing of that concerning his former sins which he hath purposed viz the leauing of theÌ„ necessarily implies that a purpose to leaue them doth goe before faith in Christ Oh but say they the following of the practise is in time therefore the going before of the purpose is in time also I deny the consequence because to the one there is no need of time that is betwixt a beginning to repent and beleeuing in Christ there needes no space of time but betwixt beleeuing in Christ and practising repentance there is required space of time viz all our life after Indeed in one place I meane by the practising of Repentance Pag. 261. l. 25. the action of Repentance with the heart or purposing so to doe and this I say goes before faith in Christ that is in nature not in time but by practise of Repâ—ntance viz
the Kingdome of Heauen and giuen them an example to follow The Apology This answere I will take away by prouing that the Repentance of the uPblicans and Harlots was to their Faith as a meanes to an end and this I will make good two wayes first by the context of the place and a reason drawne out of it secondly by the iudgement of the learned First the context or the precedent and subsequent matter of that place prooues my interpretation because the condition of the Publicans touching entring into Gods Kingdome is amplified Ver. 28. and 29. by a parable of a sonne who when he was bidden by his father to goe into the Vineyard and worke the Text faith He said he would not but afterward he repented and went ver 29. Now because by that sonne is meant the Publicans and of that sonne it is saide not onely and barely he went though hee said hee would not but that hee repented and went therefore this shewes not onely and barely he went but that therefore he went because he repented first of his not going formerly and of his saying he would not goe and therefore consequently will it follow that thâ— holy Ghost thereby meant not onely aâ— barely that the Publicans repented aâ— beleeued but that therefore they beleeueâ— because they repented first of their otheâ— sinnes for as the repenting of the sonne fâ— his not going and of his saying hee woulâ— not goe was a cause why hee went aâ— was a meanes vnto it for sorrow for past fault and purpose to leaue it musâ— needes be a meanes to the amending of it so the repenting of the Publicans anâ— Harlots for their sinnes in time past was 〈◊〉 cause and meanes of their beleeuing iâ— Christ afterward and therefore was to iâ— as a meanes to an end and consequently was in nature before it The rather is this true because wheâ— the holy Ghost comes to speake of the Scribes and Pharisees described by the other sonne which said he would and went not ver 30. he saith they repented not afterward that they might beleeue what lesse can hence be gathered but that therefore they did not beleeue in Christ viz because they did not first repent of their former wicked liues nor were prickt in heart for them nor purposed to leaue them Secondly I prooue my interpretation by the iudgement of the learned namely that the repentance of the Publicans was to their faith as a meanes to an end For in expresse words Mr. Beza sayth Bezae annot on Math. 21.32 that the repentance there spoken of was a way to the faith there mentioned I dispute not now what repentance Beza meanes Iter igitur ad fidem est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I haue prooued it to be true repentance in my Treatise and the reasons are not answered and besides now the point is granted by them Secondly Morton of repentance the argument of it toward the end Mr. Morton a learned Diuine of our Country doth so expound the words Matthew 21.32 you did not repent to beleeue or that yee might haue beleeued and thereupon concludes that repentance is distinguished from sanctification as being but a preparation thereunto For if the Pharisies did not repent to beleeue or that they might beleeue then on the contrary the Publicans did repent to beleeue or that they might beleeue and consequently their repentance was to their faith as a meanes to an end And verily if the words had gone thus in the verse they beleeued to repent or that they might repent I beleeue they would haue concluded quickly that their faith was to their repentance as a meanes to an end and consequently as a cause of an effect and therefore in nature before which is more then that they continued their beleefe or that they both repenâ— and beleeued Wherefore my exposition hauing wâ—rant from the grammer of the text agreâ—ment with the scope of the place and coâ—sent with the opinion of the learned aâ— their 's being but a bare affirmatioÌ„ therefoâ— I hope it wil hence easily follow that 〈◊〉 Doctrine grounded thereon concerniâ— the precedency of repentance to faith 〈◊〉 nature is warrantable consequently 〈◊〉 first Argument to proue it good for ougâ— hath yet beene shewed to the contrary The Triall Repentance is begunne before faith 〈◊〉 Christ The second argument because God giues men repentanâ— to the end they may beleeue in Christ 1. Tim. 2.25 The Exception To this second Argument they answer that it prooues not the question becausâ— the text of Scripture on which it is founded is not rightly expounded For say they by acknowledging the truth in Timothy 1. not meant beleeuing in Christ as I haue expounded it but professing the truth not onely in word but in life and conuersation accompanied with an inward change The Apology In defence of my interpretation I haue giuen foure reasons to three of which they answere let vs examine the validity of their answeres in order The Triall First by acknowledging the truth in Timothy is meant beleeuing in Christ because by it wee come out of the snares of the Diuell that is of the Diuells children are made the children of God The Exception This they say is not a good reason because wee come out of the snares of the Diuell by repentance as well as by faith The Apology Vpon this I reply that this instance ouerthrowes not my reason because recouering out of the snare of the Diuell is a translation from being the Diuels child to be Gods childe Now we are not made Gods children by repentance but prepared to be Gods children but it is directly sayd so of a Ioa. 1.12 Gal. 3.26 faith It is plainely sayd of faith in Christ that b 1 Ioan. 5.4 5. it is the victory whereby wee ouercome the world c 2. Pe 2 20. To the acknowledging of our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ is attributed the escaping of the pollutions of the world namely for time to come d 2 Pe. 1.3 Through the knowledge of Christ is giuen all things which appertaine to life and godlines namely to doe good workes and to performe new obedience in a setled sincere course which are no where sayd of repentance The Triall Secondly by acknowledging of the truth in Tymothy is meant faith in Christ because in other places Coloss 2.2 1 Tim. 2.4 Eph. 4.13 this faith is expressed by this Phrase The Exception To this reason they answere that though in other Scriptures a sauing faith be expressed by that phrase of acknowledging the truth yet heere in Tymothy it cannot Why because this exposition cannot stand with the analogy of faith and why forsooth because repentance cannot stand without faith in Christ or be without it The Apology By this answere a blinde man may see that they take it for granted that if by acknowledging the truth be meant beleeuing in Christ it cannot be auoyded but repentance must go before faith in
We haue a perpetuall rule saith the Homily appointed vnto vs which ought to be obserued and kept at all times Ser. of repentance 1. part in the beginning and there is none other way whereby the wrath of God may be pacified and his anger asswaged that the fiercenesse of his fury may depart and bee remooued and taken away where he saith But now therefore saith the Lord Ioel. 2.14 returne vnto me It is not without great importance that the Prophet speaketh so for hee had afore set foorth at large vnto them the horible vengeance of God which no man was able to abide and so he doth moue them to repentance to obtaine mercy Answerable to this is the Catechisme appointed to be taught in publick schooles where he saith Nowels Catch in quar fol. 5. Repentance is most necessary for sinners to the obtaining of the mercy of God and afterward Fol. 47. 48. sinners for the obtaining of pardon haue need of repentance And hereunto consents Doctor White Doct. Franc s Whites defenceÌ„ pag. 17. where he saith Ordinarily before the Lord forgiueth fowle enormous monstrous sins a sinner beginneth to detest forsake them I might and could heape vp many other testimonies both out of the Fathers and latter Writers for the further proofe thereof but that I thinke it needlesse for I suppose my aduersaries will not deny it and if they grant that repentance in nature goes before pardon then must they grant also that it goes in nature before faith in Christ Act. 10.43 for we beleeue in Christ for pardon The Triall The first Obiection Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ for then it should be sinne for whatsoeuer is before faith is without it and whatsoeuer is without faith is sinne Rom. 14. c. This they call a solid and sound Argugument but it hath nothing but a sound and shew of truth or proofe as hath and shall appeare yet more clearely God willing To this Argument I answered by denying the Antecedent viz whatsoeuer is without Faith in Christ is sinne and because the supposed truth of this proposition stands vpon the interpretation of a place of Scripture Rom 14. therefore did I answere they did not rightly expound it first because the faith mentioned in the place alleadged is not faith in Christ the Faith vnderstood in the question but another kinde of Faith viz a perswasion to the conscience of warrant to doe the things wee doe The Exception To make good their interpretation of Romans 14. vlt. and consequently their Antecedent they now bring testimonies of Diuines and reasons from Scripture First say they the text hath beene a thousand times vrged by the learned against the Pelagians and Papists in this sense The Apology I answere first it cannot be denied but the text Rom. 14. vlt. hath beene expounded by many Diuines of faith in Christ but neither do the ancients so interpret it Patres fidem scientiam libertatis exponunt quae conscientiaÌ„ precedit vel bonam vel malam eam facit Calvin Iustit l 3. c. 13. ss 17. Zanchiusde operibus Dei lib. 4. chap. 1. pag. 420 Paraeas ad Rom. c. 14. ver vlt. A learned Diuine of Germany vpon the same place confesseth as much in his commentary Nor do all the latter Interpreters For Caluin in his commentary vpon that place and in his institutions expounds it as I doe and Zanchius Nor if they did all interpret it one after another may their exposition be admitted against or besides the interpretation which the Holy Ghost in the precedent and subsequent verses of the text giues of that place it selfe which is the same with that I haue alleadged That this interpretation of Rom. 14. vlt is not to be vnderstood of Faith in Christ but of another faith as I haue alleadged is euident by considering that v. 2. of the same chapter Paul speakes of beleeuing that I may eate this or that meate vers 5. of esteeming one day aboue another or all dayes alike and of full perswasion in our mindes about the obseruation of them verse 14. of knowledge and perswasion concerning thâ—â— cleanenesse or vncleanesse of meates that iâ— the lawfulnes or the vnlawfulnesse of theâ— to be eaten verse 22. of hauing faith with our selues which is opposed to doubting or feare and lastly verse 23 the verse out of which the words are quoted of allowing or condemning our selues in the things wee do Neither of all which haue any affinity with the nature of a sauing faith which is the casting of our selues oâ— Christ and the relying on his merits for saluation or the beleeuing in his name for it of which there is not one word in the whole Chapter Besides the Apostle Rom. 14.23 doth not deliuer a rule for all our morall actions that are either commanded or forbidden the rule whereof is his written law but for those actions that be in nature such as those of which he speakes in that place viz. indifferent actions in themselues neither simply commanded nor forbidden neitheâ— good or euill which may prooue in the euent either good or euill according as his opinion iudgement â—nd conscience is of the lawfulnesse or vnâ—â—wfulnesse of them Now in these actiâ—ns for the giuing of vs a warrant to do â—r not to doe them there is no neede of â—aith in Christ the perswasion or beleefe â—â—at wee haue in our conscience by the â—â—ght of nature true reason or the word is â—â—le enough to warrant vs in the doing of â—hem or leauing of them vndone and this 〈◊〉 that faith whereof Paul speakes ver 23 Rom. 14. Adde vnto these two reasons this for a third the Apostle doth not in the place cited set downe a Rule how any or all our actions may be accepted of God vnto saluation in which case he must haue treated of faith in Christ without which it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Heb. 11.6 but. how we may know whether in our owne conscience our actions are warrantable for vs to doe them or to leaue them vndone Now in this case there is no neede of faith in Christ the perswasion or beleefe that wee haue vppon the former grounds of nature reason or the word do warrant vs in the doing or not doing of them because these tell vs and we beleeue it for truth that they be not vnlawfull and forbidden actions In my Treatise I haue giuen one reasoâ— more why in that place of the Romans by faith should not be meant faith in Christ but a beleefe of warrant to our consciences for the things we do namely becausâ— though a true beleeuer in Christ haâ—â— faith in him yet he sinnes in the actions 〈◊〉 doth if hee haue not another faith theâ— this viz. a warrant to his conscience for the thing hee doth vppon some good grounds for he cannot chuse but sinne thaâ— rushly rusheth vpon the doing of somâ—thing not being perswaded
but by hearing faith preached which is the meaning of that place Gal. 3.2 For at the preaching of the Gospell the Doctrine of faith and vpon the beleeuing thereof were they giuen Act. 10.41.44 2. The spirit of adoption is not giuen before faith in Christ for that is the grace which instrumentally and so onely giues vs prerogatiue and title to our adoption euen as it onely but instrumentally onely receiues Christ and his benefits Eph. 1.13 Gal. 3.26 Rom. 8.13 3. The gifts and graces of the spirit sufficient to saluation are not giuen before faith in Christ Heb. 11.6 Rom. 5.1 2. 4. The gift of sanctification is not giuen before Faith in Christ But for all this will it not follow that before Faith in Christ the spirit is no way giuen the contrary may be seene in illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell for these are gifts of the spirit and therefore parts of spirituall life in some sense 1. because they are supernaturall all naturall men haue them not nor are they wrought by the worke of nature in any no not in the Elect 2. because blindenesse of minde and infidelity which is contrary thereto is a branch of spirituall death 3. The Spirit inhabitant cannot be in men before they haue faith in Christ but the Spirit assistant may and the exciting by assistance may Indeede Illumination and a beleefe of the Gospell are not spirituall life enough to saluation yet is it life enough by Gods blessing and further grace to produce Faith in Christ in the elect for within man and by the working of the Spirit there is no other worke but these and that which is wrought by these which perswades men to beleeue in Christ If illumination and a beleeue of the Gospell c. had no supernaturall life at all but were altogether dead workes then could they produce no such effect as faith and if they be not dead workes then haue they some life and if they haue some life then from the spirit and if from the spirit then may they be called branches of spirituall life and hee that hath them may be sayd to haue some spirituall life begunne in him because as hath beene sayd he hath some life in him more then naturall that is more then all naturall men haue The Exception There is no spirituall life begunne in men before Faith in Christ or faith in Christ is euery way the spirituall life of Christians because sanctification goes before iustification The Apology I answere in nature saanctification is begunne before iustification 1. because regeneration is begunne before iustification namely in illumination and other preparations as hath beene shewed before Secondly because faith it selfe is a sanctifying grace by their owne confession from Acts 15.9 and faith goes in nature before iustification Indeede iustification goes in nature before the perfection of our sanctification in all the parts of it and before the acceptation of it to saluation but iustification doth not go before any or euery measure of sanctification can any way be begunne The will of God in working is the Rule of perfection to the worke and then is it sayd to be perfect when it is wrought in part or in whole according to that perfection of parts or degrees which the Lord intends vnto it at seuerall times and by seuerall meanes The Lord is no way tied for shewing the perfection of his workemanshippe to finish a worke in all the parts of it at sundry times more then he is to finish it in all the degrees thereof at sundry times The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The fift Obiection because repentance is a proper effect and fruite of the Gospell The Exception This Argument is disclaimed therefore is it vaine to spend time about it for if they will not acknowledge and confesse it I haue no reason to confute it any further Onely I would haue the world beleeue I doe not faine an enemy and then flourish against him For two learned and godly Ministers whose worthy workes are in print haue vsed the same They which bring this proposition Repentance is the proper effect and fruite of the Gospell beleeued to prooue that repentance is not begun before iustifying faith must be vnderstood to meane by a beleefe of the Gospell either that beleefe which is faith in Christ or that onely which is an assent vnto the truth of the Gospell If they meane by a beleefe of the Gospell faith in Christ then must it be their argument which I haue propounded to prooue that repentance goes not before faith in Christ If they meane but an assent to the truth of the Doctrine of the Gospell then doe they meane that no other faith goes before repentance but that and then haue they two Diuines of our owne lesse on their side then they thought they had and I haue two more on mine for I hold that a beleefe of the Gospell goes before repentance and repentance before faith in Christ and let this be enough for that fift Obiection the sixt followes The Triall Repentance is not begunne before faith in Christ The sixt Obiection because it is not begunne before regeneration for regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ This Argument was answered by denying the Antecedent viz. that Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ and the reason of the consequence viz. that repentance is not begunne before regeneration The Exception For making good the Antecedent viz. this proposition regeneration is not begunne before faith in Christ they bring two reasons to which I will answere in order Regeneration is not begunne before Faith in Christ because it issues from Christ and from our vnion with him by faith 2. Corinth 5.17 Ephesians 2.10 Colo. 2.11 The Apology I answere first if by regeneration be meant our being made Gods children actually then I grant that our regeneration must needes flow from our vnion with him by faith but then it prooues not the Antecedent for the regeneration wee speake of is not our beeing actually made the sonnes of GOD but a worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for that but if by it they meane any or euery worke of the Spirit beginning to fit vs for regeneration and tending thereunto by GODS appointment as any worke of the Spirit in the vnderstanding or will of one that is elected to saluation to fit him for regeneration by faith then I say that such regeneration may be wrought before our actuall vnion with Christ by Faith and doth not issue from it It is true that Regeneration issues from Christ in the elect whether wee consider him as the efficient cause either by way of meriting it for vs or by working it in vs. Hebrewes 12.3 Ioan. 1.19 Ephesians 1.3 2.10 or as the finall cause Galath 4.19 But it is not true that regeneration so issues from Christ that there is not so much as any the least beginning of it wrought in
Christ To the end therefore that they may preuent this they will disprooue my interpretation saying that by acknowledging the truth in Timothy is not meant faith in Christ why because it cannot Why can it not be so meant because it is against the analogy of faith why is it against the analogy of faith because repentance cannot be without faith what is this but to runne in a ring and to hunt Counter without proouing any thing who sees not that this is to beg the question and vpon the matter to prooue â—dem per idem mouere non promouere I prooue repentance goes before faith â—n Christ because repentance goes beâ—ore the acknowledging of the truth â—hich is a sauing faith They answere â—e reason is not good because by acknowâ—edging the truth there cannot be meant â—aith in Christ why cannot faith in Christ â—e meant there because repentance is not â—efore or without faith in Christ The Triall Thirdly by acknowledging of the truth in Timothy is meant faith in Christ because it is called the faith of the elect Timâ— 1.1 for onely the elect haue a sauing faith because onely the elect haue a Sauiour and are saued by him The Exception To this they answer by denying my interpretation of the Epistle to Titus for say they the Apostle doth not there explicate what he meant by acknowledging of the truth namely the faith of the elect For those words doe not shew what the faith of the elect is but distinguish it from the faith of the elect The Apology Vpon this I reioyne in this manner 1. Ancient Interpreters both a Gagneius Guilliaudus Papists and b Calvin Beza Piscatur Protestants doe expound the words as I doe that the latter are put exegetically for the interpretation of the former 2 My Aduersaries barely say the wordes distinguish and not interpret without any reason of their affirmation and therefore it is not good 3 If those wordes acknowledging of the truth be a distinction betweene the former words viz. the faith of the elect then do they distinguish two faiths then do they distinguish the faith of the elect which is a sauing faith from an acknowledging of the truth or an assent vnto it which is an Historicall faith then by acknowledging the truth must be meant an Historicall faith but by the acknowledging the truth in Timothy cannot be meant an Historicall faith because an Historicall faith cannot follow repentance in nature but goe before it for the acknowledging the truth there spoken whateuer it bee doth follow the repentance there spoken of because it is thereunto as an effect vnto a cause or as an end to a meanes for so much they confesse themselues in their exposition of the sence of that place which in their Iudgement and words runs thus that God may giue them repentance that those which now oppose the truth may be wonne to the profession of it So that either those words the acknowledging of the truth must not distinguish that which is meant by them from the faith of the elect and by them must be meant an Historicall faith and then repentance must goe before an Historicall faith or a beleefe of the Gospell or the acknowledging the truth doth interpret the nature of the faith of the elect there spoken of and then repentance must go before the faith of the elect vtrum horum and so much in defence of the reasons of my exposition of the text to Timothy wherein my second Argument is grounded now a word onely in answere to their Interpretation of the place The Exception By acknowledging the truth 2. Tim. 2.25 must be meant say they the profession of the truth and their reason is because in Peter the phrase is so to bee taken 2. Peter 2.21 The Apology I answere 1. Neither do they bring any good reason why the phrase must be so vnderstood in Peter nor if they did could that proue it must be so vnderstood in Paul nor haue they giuen any good reason from the text of Paul of their exposition and therefore their interpretation without reasons for it is not so good as mine with reasons 2 In that place Paul speakes of the conuersion of Infidels in this conuersion a beleefe of the Gospell hath the first place then repentance then faith in Christ then profession as a fruite of faith but if their exposition of the words acknowledging the truth by professing of the truth were good profession must go in the first place for there is no mention at all of any other so that either by those words cannot be meant profession of the truth or men must professe the truth at their first conuersion before they haue either an Historicall or sauing faith 3 In their owne words they expound what profession they meane viz. not onely in word but in life and conuersation accompanied with an inward change Now hereby they confound repentance and acknowledging the truth which are different for the one is a meanes to the other whatsoeuer is meant by them for what is repentance in their iudgement but an outward and inward change of soule and body of words and workes The Triall Repentance is begunne before faith in Christ The third Arment because men cannot beleeue in Christ as long as they liue in their sinnes Ioa. 5.44 The Exception This Argument they say prooues not the question for it onely prooues that a man must repent of his sinnes as soone as he beleeues in Christ and not that he must repent before he beleeues The Apology To this I say that had I intended to prooue a precedency of repentance vnto faith in Christ some space of time then I confesse this answere had beene sufficient to that Argument because as it is propounded it prooues no more but forasmuch as my purpose was not so much but lesse viz. a precedency in nature only therefore is not the answere to purpose and consequently for all that it is sound and good for two things may be in time as soone one as another and yet in nature the one may goe before the other as fire and heate a father and a childe else how can they with any colour hold faith and repentance to be together in time and yet faith to go before it in nature and in order of causes Though my Argument be good as it is in the Treatise for all that which they haue answered vnto it yet as I shall now propound it it shall be more strong If liuing in sinne go before not beleeuing in Christ as a cause and meanes thereof then repenting of sin goes before beleeuing in Christ as a cause and meanes thereof But the first is true therefore the second The consequence is good because to liue in sinne and to repent are contrary so are not to beleeue in Christ and to beleeue in him so that if vnrepentance impenitency or liuing in sinne be a meanes and cause of not beleeuing and to be a