Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	faith_n	reveal_v	5,457	5	8.8529	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86612	The pagan preacher silenced. Or, an answer to a treatise of Mr. John Goodwin, entituled, the pagans debt & dowry. Wherein is discovered the weaknesse of his arguments, and that it doth not yet appear by scripture, reason, or the testimony of the best of his own side, that the heathen who never heard of the letter of the Gospel, are either obliged to, or enabled for the believing in Christ; and that they are either engaged to matrimonial debt, or admitted to a matrimonial dowry. Wherein also is historically discovered, and polemically discussed the doctrin of Universal grace, with the original, growth and fall thereof; as it hath been held forth by the most rigid patrons of it. / By Obadiah Howe, A.M. and pastor of Horne-Castle in Lincolnshire. With a verdict on the case depending between Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Howe, by the learned George Kendal, DD.	Howe, Obadiah, 1615 or 16-1683.; Kendall, George, 1610-1663.	1655 (1655)	Wing H3051; Thomason E851_16; ESTC R207423	163,028	140

edge of this text Now I hope he will not say that this hearing and preaching is by the heavens for then the heavens must be sent by God to preach in order to faith but how will he prove that but thus he answereth to this text and Argument Pag. 32. in the 32 Page of this Treatise The meaning of these Interrogatories is not as if no man could possibly believe the Gospel but he that heard it personally preached by a Minister but implyeth these three things 1 That man having corrupted himself was in no probability to believe on God by Jesus Christ without the advantage of some report of the Gospel made in one kinde or other 2 That there was no likelihood to hear of God or of Christ in the Gospel had there not been some one or more to have preached the Gospel in the world 3 It was not likely that any man or men should or would have preacht the Gospel had they not been sent and received instructions concerning the publishing of it In which answers 1 He prevaricateth and halteth manifestly for his first particular comes far short of truth as he intendeth it viz. that it is any part of the Apostles meaning to affirm that we could not believe without Christ was discovered in the Gospel by some way and in one kinde or other as if he purposely left such a latitude as that he might take in the light of nature as one kinde of discovery of Christ sufficient for faith which is evidently false for that hearing without which he saith we cannot believe is confined to the hearing the letter of the Gospel which men are sent by commission to preach and that to beget faith and in that Apostolical Induction the last and the first have as strong a dependance as any two and it is as true that no man can believe except some be sent as this No man can believe except he hear 2 But I desire no more then he gives for solution to confirm us he granteth three things 1 That none can believe without the report of the Gospel in one kinde or other 2 That we are not likely to heare of Christ in the Gospel without some preach 3 That it is not likely that any should preach except they be by Commissions and Instructions sent Now what need we more then this to confirm us that men cannot nor are bound to believe meerly by the light of Nature without some further discovery thereof in the Gospel Thus I have traversed all Mr. Goodwins steps and yet it appeareth not that man is either enabled or bound to believe in Christ meerly by the law and light of Nature and yet having done with the law of Nature he proceeds further to say That all men are bound to believe on Jesus Christ by the Positive law of God and this he doth in Page the 44th and he gives two Scriptures to prove it Pag. 44. Psal 2.12 1 Joh. 3.23 Psal 2.12 Kiss the Son Be wise O ye Judges of the earth And 1 Joh. 3.23 This is the commandement that we believe on his Son Jesus Christ From these Scriptures he would prove that all men without exception are bound to believe on Jesus Christ by the Positive law of God but to this I answer 1 How impertinent is all this to his purpose if he could prove it to be truth that which he is to prove is that even those that never heard of the letter of the Gospel and so by consequence not of the commands thereof that those are bound to believe and now he proves that all are bound by a Positive law that is in effect thus that those that never heard of the letter of the Gospel have yet a Positive law to bind them to believe it seemes he doth not so well consider as he might that for any man to have such a Positive law is to have the letter of the Gospell 2 I hope henceforth the Remonstrants will never say that faith in Jesus Christ was never commanded to our fathers of old under the time of the Law Mr. Goodwin will teach them better Divinity and tell them they were all commanded to it by a Positive law 3 Mr. Goodwin himselfe affirmeth that the faith that was required of the Jews to justification under the Law had Christ in it only virtually and interpretatively and explicitely none but God himselfe and therefore God would accept such a faith much more in the Gentiles Pag. 38. Pag. 38. and yet now they were all commanded by a Positive law to believe in Christ I hope Mr. Goodwin will reconcile all these together 4 But to examine the truth of his assertion whether that command was a sufficient obligation to all men to believe how will Mr. Goodwin prove that this was any obligation to any man untill it be revealed to them Let that stand which Musculus saith upon the text Quisnam mortalium ab hâc submissione excipitur cùm ipsis regibus imponitur true no man is exempted from this submission when this command shall come greeting yet not obliged until they heare the command But Mr. Goodwin drives on these general commands thus far upon 1 Joh. 3.23 he saith thus he cannot be conceived only to speake to Saints or such who are believers already as if these were the men whom God commands to believe in the Name of his Son for then it will follow that those that did believe before the command did supererogate nor can it be meant of them only who have the letter of the Gospell for then such as believe without the letter thereof do also supererogate and therefore it must not be understood we Saints or we that have the letter of the Gospel but we men wherein Mr. Goodwin layeth many feeble snares as easily broken as spiders webbes 1 By the face of his expressions I find that he supposeth it irrational that this or any command should be given or asserted to any that do already believe but many expresses of Scripure will rescue such a practice from al the charges of impropriety had he not so much time or leasure to look upon the foregoing verse where he saith We receive what we ask because we keep his commandement 1 John 3.22 23 and this is the commandement that we believe in his Son and yet in his divinity it must not be we Saints or we that have the Gospel but we men as if it might be said of all men that we keep the commandement in 1 John 2.12 13 14 15. the Apostle saith I write to you fathers young men 2.12 13 14 15. children because ye have known him from the beginning and are strong the Word of God abideth in you and ye have overcome the wicked one Love not the world neither the things that are of the world must we reason thus he writes not to those that love not the world already for otherwise they observing that piece of Christian practice before

then was it required in order to his salvation then there was a principle vested by God in the nature of man to recover and save himselfe and this principle to be carryed over unmaymed from the estate of integrity to the estate of sin into which he plunged himselfe and then also to remaine in the same vigour in his posterity so every person of mankind to be in a capacity of salvation if so then Christ must have dyed for all without exception His intentions in these reasonings I cannot well divine but what ever it be I retort upon him thus if they be to overthrow the position of his adversary as by so many monstruous absurdities he must know they are all his own if otherwise he intend hereby to gaine upon his adversary in these deductions and draw him by degrees into his owne tent by the ducture of these his owne positions then I thus argue Either all these are the genuine and legitimate inferences from his positions or not if not then he beateth the ayre and must cast about for another postscript if they be then I demand an account why Mr. Goodwin ownes the inferences and yet disclaimes the Position from whence they genuinely flow when any one may easily see it to be more congruous to the whole purport of his treatise to affirm it then to deny it Seeing it is his task to prove that every man by the law of nature onely is bound to believe repent which is utterly out irrecoverably lost if Adam in that interval was not bound to believe or repent in which he had the light of nature as much as ever after I might here propound an Argument of some considerable strength against his main position thus If Adam was not tyed by the law of nature to repent then his posterity is not But hee was not Ergo his posterity is not But I shall pursue this more pertinently when I answer his argument whereby he proves that the law of nature bindeth every man to repent and believe Thus having propounded his first Argument in which he hath done nothing in relation to the controversie in hand because he hath not in it proved that God ever gave a command or laid an obligation upon any such man or men to repent to whom the letter of the Gospel never came either in the commands or the promises of it He yet can before he begin handsomely to combat triumph as he doth Pag. 8 9. pag. 8. 9. where he concludeth thus From the premises it further appeareth that the Gentiles to whom the letter the written letter of the Gospel never came and amongst whom the name of Jesus Christ haply was never named yet in sufficient propriety of speech and largenesse enough of truth may be sayd to have the Gospel preached to them though not in that critical formality of the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and praedicare a dialect which the Holy Ghost commonly neglecteth I wonder Mr. Goodwin doth not blush that the world should see so much weaknesse falshood and boldnesse come from him in one line 1. What cause hath he to say that this he hath now uttered plainly appeares from the premises was there ever mention made of the Gentiles who never heard of the letter of the Gospel or of the name of Christ or of the preaching of the Gospel to such Let him if he think good form those premises and this conclusion into an Argument and I believe it will be of smal strength 2. What is it that doth by the premises appear I fea● it is some such thing as that not onely not by the premises but not by all that Mr. Goodwin can say will yet appear It is this that they that never had the letter the written letter of the Gospel or the name of Christ named may yet properly be said to have had the Gospel preached But 1. How cau●elous is he the letter the written letter surely he doth intend to play with this terme letter of the Gospel as if we held that none are tyed to believe but they to whom the written letter comes or as if it were his task to prove that more are tyed to believe then they to whom the written letter is come I say again it matters not how the discovery be made by reading hearing a voice from heaven an Angel from heaven or any which way God shall chuse so that it be but beyond what nature discovereth it confirmeth us and overthroweth him 2. How miserably doth he praevaricate and change the face of the question that which he is to prove is that they are bound to believe to whom the letter of the Gospel never cometh but he now deceitfully shaffles in an Heterogenius expression if he himselfe divine right viz. Or the Name of Christ ever named Betwixt which and the former there is a wide difference so much as that the one may be without the other as he saith pag. 9. The Gospel was preached to the ancient Jews yet the name of Christ was not named amongst them Hereby he hath this advantage that we should think it his task to prove that they that have not the name of Christ named are bound to believe when his assertion looks quite with another face this is nothing ingenuous 3. Whereas he saith they may be said in propriety of speech and largenesse of truth enough to have had the Gospel preached I demand by what and if Mr. Goodwin should do to me as he did to Mr. Simpson in their conference affirme a sufficient meanes of believing but think it besides the question to state it what those means were he might make me seek the preacher but he is a little more ingenuous and tells us Pag. 10.11 that the heavens the day and the night and the providence of God rain and fruitfull seasons These are M● Goodwins preachers and that these are properly said to preach the Gospel he affirmeth wherein hee excuseth a heap of falsities under the shelter of one intimated and implyed truth For anatomize his assertion into these axiomes 1. The heavens preach 2. They preach in propriety of speech 3. They preach the Gospel 4. They preach the Gospel in propriety of speech One alone is true and the rest very false The first I will easily grant that the heavens are said to preach For as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth enerravit and is properly attributed to animate and rational creatures as Psal 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will declare the decree of God Psal 2. yet I find that it is also extended to the heavens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the heavens declare the glory of God So I grant that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to Cry from whence cometh the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the verb which signifieth to preach may also be extended to inanimate creatures though examples of it

he calleth on all men to repent and believe in Christ without exception B●t had he either discovered or considered what call they mean I perswade my selfe he would have waved their testimony He would make us believe that they affirm that God calls all to repentance by such a call as is without the letter of the gospel otherwise what is their testimony to his cause But in so doing he is guilty of manifest subornation for as for Calvin he witnesseth no such thing and that I cleare thus 1. He is so far from testifying to Mr Goodwins assertion that he saith that no man is sufficiently enabled to the knowledge of the Creatour without the familiar ducture of the Scriptures it is the adequate subject of the sixt chapter of the first book of his Institutions and if he say that man cannot come to the saving knowledge of his creator without the help of the written word we cannot rationally conceive that he whom Mr Goodwin calleth one of the best of the Protestant Divines should also say that a heathen man can come to the knowledge of his redeemer without the help of the written word or if he doe his testimony doth not agree with it selfe and so I shall lay it aside as not to bee taken in so weighty a cause 2. A second reason is this because I find him sometimes treating of that call whereby he saith God calls all without exception but in a sense far different from Mr. Goodwins dreames for in his discourse upon that text Many called but few chosen he saith thu● Nothing is ambiguous if we hold that there is a double kind of calling Nihil erit ambiguum si teneamus duplicem esse vocationis speciem un versalis una quâ ●mnes pariter ad se invitat deus perexternam verbi praedicationem et am quibus eam in mortis odo em proponit Ca●v institut lib. 3o. c. 24. § 8 there is an universal call by which he calleth all alike to him in the external preaching of his word even them to whom it becomes the savour of death and the matter of more severe condemnation Now this is clearely Calvins meaning in his general cal so much relyed upon by Mr. Goodwin viz. by the express preaching of the gospel orally n●t at all any such universal cal by the creatures without the letter of the Gospel and until he can produce one place in all the workes of Calvin wherein he mentioneth any other call to Jesus Christ then by the letter of the gospel he must with me lye under the censure of a wil●ull and shamelesse pervertour of mens words for his owne purpose and if he thus meane by his general call then what strength this testimony contributeth to Mr. Goodwins cause let any judg who holds that all have a sufficiency for faith in Christ without the letter of the gospel And at the same rate runneth the testimony of Musculus As for the suffrage of the British divines at the Synod of Dort I cannot conceive that any who had his vote in the suffrage of that Synod about the five controverted points can produce any pertinent testimony for him my reason is because I find them thus speaking point blank against him Cap. 4o. of conversion Sect. 4. In man there are some remainders of the light of nature whereby he retaineth some principles of God c. But so far is he from being enabled by this inbred light to come to the saving knowledge of God and to turne himselfe unto him that he doth not make use of it in natural things And againe in that chapter of conversion one of the errors concerning that article which they rej●ct is as followeth that man can so use the common grace the light of nature that by it he may receive evangelical grace and that God hath for his part shewne himselfe ready to reveale Christ to all men seeing he doth sufficiently afford to every man necessary meanes for the making of Christ knowne and for faith and repentance Now if they reject that as an errour which is the adequate subject of Mr. Goodwins assertion certainely these are no probable or likely men to add any strength to his cause and I expect in his next that he produce the words and place where any of these men speake of a faith grounded onely upon the sound of the heavens or that the heathen are enabled by the light of nature to believe in Christ or else to judge himselfe whether it be not an unchristian course to force such a sense of mens writings contrary to the stresse and current of their judgement that so he may have the more plausible way for his causeless calumny of inconsistencies and contradictions and when he hath so barbarously broken their heads so childishly to give them a plaister by anking them in the number of the best Protestant Divines because he thinks they speake of his side Thus have I examined all his proofes both divine and humane and I cannot but adjudg them far short of proving his tenent and therfore I advise him either to send out new or to take a review of these in a second and better examination for they are all impertinent to the question first propounded some of them necessarily inferring the letter of the gospel the rest not inferring at all either repentance or faith in Jesus Christ therefore no proper testimony for this doctrine that all men without exception are bound to believe in Christ though they never heard the letter of the gospel And thus I have indeavoured to satisfie his owne desires and have taken the weapons out of his hands pag. 6. by which he thus unhandsomely digladiates against the truth and I shall conclude I have done it until I see in his next how hee doth reassume them or else surrender up to me this his first hold to which I finde him something inclined because as suspecting the strength of that which he hath all this while spoken he retreateth to a second which hath no coherence at all with this which I shal examine In the 15. Page of his Treatise we find him thus speaking Suppose we grant for Arguments sake that the heathen to whom the gospel was never orally preached were not in an immediate capacity of believing it in those terms of believing lately expressed yet this proves not but that they may be in a remote capacity of believing such a capacity I meane which by a regular and conscientious exercise of those worthy abilities which God hath conferd upon them might by the ordinary blessing and by the standing course of providence of God in such cases have risen up to an immediate capacity in this kind so that a heathen man who never heard of Jesus Christ may yet by the effect of the law written in their heart quit himselfe to such a degree of well pleasing to God that he will not fayl to reveale his son Christ to him after some

such manner and degree as will become saving to him as Christ saith habenti dabitur to him that hath shall be given He grants it onely for argumentation sake that the heathen are not in an immediate capacity of believing it seemeth then that he hath been hitherto proving that the heathen are in an immediate capacity of believing as indeed the whole surface of his discourse tendeth this way I say capacity as he here expresseth it because I hope he hath no piece of deceit in his eye when he for sufficiency puts capacity Now M● Goodwin hath not been alwayes of this mind that the heathen are in an immediate capacity or have an immediate sufficiency of believing in Christ for in his dispute with Mr. Simpson I find him thus pag. 79. upon the distinction and application of sufficiency mediate and immediate My sense is of the question in hand thus I doe not meane that the Gentiles or any other man hath a present or immediate sufficiency of meanes to believe originally given them of God but a remote sufficiency that is such as by the use of it they may possess themselves of further meanes by which they may be enabled to believe As Mr. Goodwin is a man that professeth religion and earnest contention for the truth I am sorry for him but as he is a scholler and received by all as a man of eminent parts I am ashamed of him that the world should see such pregnant symptomes of an imposture upon him that when he is forced to say that no man hath an immediate sufficiency originally given him of God to believe he should now say that he only supposeth for arguments sake that the heathen have not an immediate capacity of believing Mr. Goodwin knowes well what kind of men they are that stand in need of good memories and let him make this one of his first retractations and let the world know that it is not the wantonnesse but necessity of his genius that extorts this supposition from him for had he not this hold to fly to there would be no more occasion left for dispute the matter is so cleare against him both by the evidence of reason and his own concessions But to let this passe I shall examine that which he here in the second place urgeth although it be utterly impertinent to the maine businesse which he undertooke to prove and the rather because in this he being one spirit with the Remonstrants I have the fairer plea to examine also that which is the fairest plea for an universal sufficient grace as it is most plausibly layd downe by the best of Mr. Goodwins way and that he and the Arminians are of one opinion in this I shall make appear by these following instances The Remonstrants in their solemne convention before the Synod of Dort make out universal grace thus a Omnibus hominum cordibus insculpsit aliquā saicognitionem itaque communi vocatione omnes ad se vocat deus non eo quidem fine ut secundùm istius communis vocationis tenorem gratiaeque generaliotis mensuram vitam institueates immediatè serventur sed ut per eam disponantur ut evangelicae praedicationis quâ ipsa salus offertur concionis de vitâ ●ternâ rescipiscentiae et fidei deque Christi gratia et justitia quâ vita aeterna per fidem obtinenda et impetrata est idonei reddantur auditores Act. Synod art 2. p. 327. God hath inscribed in the hearts of all men some knowledge of himselfe c. and so by this common call he calls all to himself not to that end that those that live according to the tenour of this common call or rule of this more general grace should immediately be saved but that by this call they may be disposed and rendred hearers of that gospel wherein salvation is offered and that a doore may be opened to that sermon of eternal life wherein the doctrine of repentance faith and spiritual obedience and the grace and righteousnesse of Christ whereby eternal life is impetrated and to be obtained by faith And Arminius also in his examen of Mr. Perkins saith to the same purpose thus b Dum Christi cognitione destituuntur tamen se Deus sine testimonio non reliquit et in illo tempore aliquam veritatem de potentia et bonitate sua illis pati fecit Legem quoque ment●bus insculptam conservverit quibus bonis si rectè usi fuissent saltem ex conscientia majorem etiam gratiam ipse etiam concessurus fuisset Secundùm illud habenti dabitur Arm. anteperk pag. 259. Even whilst they are destitute of the knowledge of Christ yet God leaveth not himselfe without witnesse and at the same time maketh knowne to them the truth of his power and goodnesse and doth conserve a law written in their minds which good things if they use well or at the least conscienciously God is ready to grant to them according to that text to him that hath shal be given And further in the same page he saith thus c Omnes homines aliqua vocatione vocantur nempè per istam testificationem de quâ adduci possunt ut palpando eum invenient c. haec autem vo a●●o quanquā salu a●s no nest utp●●e per eam salus immediat● obtinenda est sed praecedanea potest dici salutari quâ Christus offertur q●ae i●sam rectè usur patam ex Dei milericordia sequutura est ibid. God calls all men with some kind of call to wit by that testification of God by which they may be brought to grope after God and so to find him c. which call although it be not saving so that salvation shall be immediately obteined by it yet it may be said to be precedaneous to that which is saving wherein Christ himself is offered which last out of the mercy of God is ready to follow the good use of the former And are not all these devised methods one and the same with this which Mr. Goodwin excudeth and do they not lay their foundation of Universal grace very low even in the Bowels of nature it self and in all as well in them as in Mr. Goodwin it amounteth to this that God gives to all some natural abilities with assisting grace which if they improve well God will reveal Christ and so give more grace till they come to be saved according to that text To him that hath shall be given the lowest stone of which foundation I shall indeavour to raise and to Anatomize this intricate method of Universal grace To effect which I shall make a little digression not at all from the question yet from Mr. Goodwin that I may exchange a word or two with the Remonstrants in the examination of the said two things 1. How they prove that which is given to all to be grace 2. How they prove it to be sufficient The rest I shall examine when I return to Mr.

the regulating of our lives which he can no ways prove God doth by the Gospel in any proportionable discovery But he undertaketh to prove by a twofold Argument that nature bindeth all men to believe on Christ if reduced to form it would run thus If nature binds us to use the best means for our welfare and peace then it binds us to believe it being the only way to life But nature bindeth all men to use the best meant for their welfare Therefore c. The Argument is plausible enough if he had not himself laid the ground of its confutation the same notions will answer it that I gave before nature teacheth no man to use any means for his welfare but what he knoweth to be in such a tendency but the question presupposeth that they do not yet know and when they come to know true then they are bound to observe it but the state of the question is altered A second Argument which he useth is deduced from Acts 4.12 where the Apostle saith that There is no name under Heaven by which a man can be saved but Iesus Christ but how the Argument must be formed or where the strength of it lyeth he puts us to the labour to seek it out He saith that this text crosseth two main Pillars of his Adversaries doctrine the first I own with a little correction thus That the law of Salvation viz. He that believeth shall be saved respecteth those that are Evangelized onely that is such as have the discovery of the Gospel by some way and means beyond and above the light of nature So that this be understood of Adults for as for Infants how God dealeth with them whether they be saved by faith or whose faith or what faith or how I leave it to Mr. Goodwin to determine Let him understand me thus and then I challenge him to prove how that text Acts 4.12 overthroweth this it seemeth Mr. Goodwin thinketh that this Law of Salvation as he calleth it He that believeth shall be saved doth not respect men Evangelized onely I know not what sophistical sense he may retein of those words doth not respect he may know that the point in hand is about obligation to believe so that he ought to have exprest it thus That Law of Salvation respecteth not onely men Evangelized as a bond or obligation to believe but thus it is very liable to scruple for this Law of Salvation as he calleth it He that beleeveth shall be saved must be considered as conceived in God onely in his minde and purpose whereby as the Remonstrants say he did certam rationem statuere appoint a certain way by which he would save men and thus considered it is not to come under the notion of an obliging principle because thus it is hidden in God and so nothing to us Secondly it is considerable as discovered and pronounced to the world whereby the Lord acquainteth us with his gracious award concerning us and thus will Mr. Goodwin say that it respects not only persons Evangelized when the very discovery of this to us is Evangelization and the discovery of the Gospel and it becomes an obligation to none but them that have it discovered to them But in his next I expect that he produce his argument in form that I may know what he intendeth and I shall return answer But he proceeds in his magnificates of the light of nature thus My principles will not allow we to gratifie you with my bel●efe of your position which is that the light of nature cannot discover to mankinde that there was or ever would be such a Mediatour or man as Jesus Christ What principles they are which thus obstruct his faith or belief of the truths of God are best known to himself the principles of saving truth will tell us that we may read of a naturall Theology but of a naturall Christianity no where This is revealed by a new way hence the Jews stumbled at it and the Greeks derided it as inconsistent with their Philosophicall and naturall principles the World by their wisedome knew not God how then can the light of Nature discover a Christ it is not by wisdome of the world but the foolishness of preaching that he saveth men and that the preaching by men not the heavens for this last preaching involves the wisdome of the world But because he will leave no stone unturned he by way of concession thus saith Suppose it cannot discover a Christ in such particularities as now under the Gospel yet it cannot be denied but that it may so far discover him as that a man may be rationally perswaded through him to depend upon God for the pardon of his sins and salvation But this is meer trifeling for we say that the light of Nature alone is unable not onely to discover a Christ in particularities but at all and upon that ground no man can be perswaded to depend upon God through him for thus suppose that a man know that Christ is it is strange that he should recede from the first position and suppose that the light of nature did not and could not discover that such a man as Christ ever was and yet to suppose that by the light of nature a man may be perswaded to depend upon God for life through Christ but he attempteth to prove that the light of nature doth discover so much as that men may be so rationally perswaded to depend on God through Christ for life and this he proved by two Arguments 1. His first Argument is from the Jews who he saith The sum of what they believed concerning Christ was this that God had found out a way and pleased himself in a means how to shew mercy and forgive sins and save their souls that put their trust in him and live righteously yet they believed to salvation though Christ not discovered to them in such particularities as now wherein he doth egregiously prevaricate for 1 That which he is to prove was this that men by the light of nature can so farre discover Christ as that they are rationally perswaded to depend on God for salvation through Christ but in all this abstract which he produceth what syllable is it that gives the least hint of Christ It is only thus that they beleeved that God pleased himself in a way and means to shew mercy forgive sin to save the soules of them that trust in him and live righteously now let the World judge whether any or all of these do infer a dependance upon God for life through Christ 2 Suppose it did so what pertinency hath this instance to the case in hand He instanceth in the Jews who had the written Word or vocall discoveries of Christ proportionable to their faith in Christ a generall and indistinct knowledge of Christ being every way proportionable to a generall and indistinct faith Now suppose they had a generall and indistinct faith in Christ yet if this faith came by a generall

and indistinct discoveries either by written Word or vocal dispensation then this instance is very vainly produced to prove that the light of nature without other discovery can discover Christ in particularities or in general 2 His second Argument by which he proveth it is this and it is by the complication of three Propositions thus Jesus Christ is in such a faith wherby men are enabled to come to God with acceptance John ●4 6 Again by such a faith Pag. 39. whereby a man believeth that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him he is enabled to come to God Heb. 11.6 and further the Heathen by the light of nature without the advantage of the Gospel may come to believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him by which he proveth that a Heathen meerly by the law and light of nature may discover Christ so as that by him he may come to God with acceptance and a very plausible plea it were if it did not favour too much of the windings of the subtile serpent I shall consider them in order apart and then leave them to Mr. Goodwin to improve joyntly and together 1 His first Proposition is That Christ is in that faith whereby men are enabled to come to God with acceptance this I assert for a truth but all together contradictious and inconsistent with the words of the Remonstrants and Mr. Goodwin himself it is son thing remarkable to consider that when he would magnifie the light of nature by making it to run parallel with that which the Jews enjoyed he then reduced the object of faith to a low scantling and in the Page immediately foregoing affirmed that the Jewes believed to salvation and yet believed nothing but this that God had pleased himselfe with a way meanes of mercy and saving men that trust in him and live righteously Pag. 36. where is there the least intimation of Jesus Christ in all that and yet they believed to salvation Pag. 37 38. and therefore came to God with acceptance and again speaking of the faith of the Jews of old he saith That they did not believe on Christ except interpretatively and virtually but only expresly in God and yet none could deny but they believed to salvation but now needs must Christ be in such a faith without any such limitation and restriction as interpretatively or virtually and how is it averred and that both from reason and Scripture as the Remonstrants pretend that faith in Jesus Christ was never exacted nor performed by the Fathers under the Old Testament 2 His second Propositition is this That by such a faith whereby a man believeth that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him a man is enabled to come to God Heb. 11.6 which proposition is false and by it he suborneth a text for his cause that text Heb. 11.6 saith indeed that he that commeth to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of thim that seek him but it saith nor neither will it follow that all that believe those things are enabled to come with acceptance the Devils in hell and many reprobates may and do believe these and yet they are not enabled to come to God with acceptance I wonder that any man of that way who to that text Joh. 6. No man comes except my Father draw him say that it doth not follow therefore that all that he draws do come should thus prevaricate for their own ends in this text 3 His third Proposition is this That every man by the light of nature can come to know that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him which I do not only bring into question but do affirm also to be false true indeed if we speak in generall terms by the light of nature a man may discover that God is and that he is a rewarder c. but if we make a particular application to man in his corrupt estate then I say that no man without the letter of the Gospell can come to know this the Law concludeth us all under an eternall curse now who can know or what way is extant to believe a reward upon any termes but by the Gospell and more then nature can discover So that taking this short survey of the Propositions apart if any please let him put them together and judge what solid argument for the truth can be drawn out of one inconsistencie and two falsities and if this my answer please him nor let him in his next bring them into better form of arguing and I shall say more it is as methodicall an answer as I thought good to give to such a confused and indigested argument And now I have seen the strength of his arguments whereby he hath attempted to prove that the light of nature doth oblige a man to believe I shall urge one or two to prove that the law of nature neither doth nor can and thus I urge Arg. 1 If Adam before such time as the promise was given was under nor such obligation as to repent and so to believe then the law of nature doth not can not binde men to repent and believe in Christ But the former is true Therefore the latter is true also The Proposition of this Argument is grounded upon this that Adam had the law of nature and more quick-sighted into the creatures and common providence of God then any of his posterity and he equally bound to take the best course for his own welfare and yet he was not bound to repent and believe then certainly his posterity are not obliged by the meer light of Nature I desire some proof why the fame Light and Law of Nature that was no bond or obligation to Adam could be so to his posterity If Adam had the light of Nature and yet was not bound to believe or repent it was either 1 Because he could not discover such a thing as satisfaction or a Mediatour or Christ he saw only a reprieve no pardon or satisfaction and if thus how can his posterity meerly by the Law and light of Natur discover a Saviour 2 Or else if he did discover then it was because he had no command to believe or repent as he intimateth in his Postscript because the obligation dependeth upon a command and if so then how can they who never had the letter of the Gospel be said to be obliged to believe and repent Thus the Major is strengthened Arg. 2 The Minor is his own in so many words in his Postscript If men cannot here believe without hearing nor heare without preaching nor preach without sending then men cannot believe without a further discovery of the Gospel then what the light of Nature affordeth But the former is true Rom. 10.14 Rom. 10.14 I chuse this argument founded upon this text because Mr. Goodwin seeks to temper and take off the

he giveth all things but what is the improvement that the Apostle aims at or any man can rationally expect from these things The Apostle tells us That they might seek the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to seek the Lord and by a gr●ping after him to find him Now Mr. Goodwin laying the prejudice of his opinion aside may consider with me 1. That the person that these are propounded to discover is not Jesus Christ the mediator but the Lord God the party offended it was not to discover an attonement or satisfaction but a deity not to bring men in to believe in Christ or repent of their idolatry but onely to restraine them further persistence in idolatry 2. Consider that it is not clearely to see God and roundly to draw out the most intimate conclusions concerning him but onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 levi tactu pertractare or palpare as it is rendred to grope as blind men Now if this text urge as much every way as Act. 14.16 and yet ariseth no higher then the groping after God in his works as blinde men and by it attaining some kind of knowledge of him to keep from worshipping stocks and stones then it is probable that that text Acts 14.16 17. speaketh not of showres and fruitful seasons as fit and proper testimonies to discover a Christ and a Saviour and to enable men to draw out very roundly the substance of the Gospel Argum. 2 If it be not likely that men should heare of Jesus Christ in the Gospel except some one or more had been sent to preach it then the raine and fruitfull seasons are not proper testimonies of Jesus Christ neither do preach him But the former is true therefore the latter is true also Let not M● Goodwin seek this subterfuge to evade the validity of the proposition by distinguishing betwixt the Gospel and the sound of the heavens for he makes the Gospel to carry such a latitude as that it conteineth in it the sound of the heavens and to heare it by the creatures is in his sense to heare it in the Gospel as he himselfe affirmeth thus I grant the preaching of the Gospel is the onely sufficient mean●s of faith in Christ Dispute with Mr. Simpson p. 65. but then I add that raine and fruitfull seasons doe preach the Gospel And so in his own judgement to hear of Christ any way is to heare of him in the Gospel and it is but consonant to reason because the very hearing of Christ is Gospel Now upon this foundation I build my Argument for if this be true that men cannot heare of this Gospel or of Christ in the Gospel except one or more doth discover it and be sent for that purpose then it must follow that the fruitfull showres and seasons do not preach the Gospel For these are not they that Mr. Goodwin would have to be sent to preach in Rom. 10.14 Rom. 10.14 But the Minor is Mr. Goodwins own speaking of that text Rom. 10.14 How shal they heare without a preacher saith thus That it is not likely that any man should heare of Christ in the Gospel Pagans debt pag. 33 if some or more had not been sent by God to publish it in the world Argum. 3 If that text Act. 14.16 who suffered the nations to walk in their own ways speaketh thus much to us that God did not deal with men as under the Gospel but onely give them meanes to restraine them from their evil wayes then those fruitful seasons did not preach Christ nor doth that text enforce any such thing But the former is true therefore the latter is true also The proposition is grounded upon this truth When God discovers Christ any way and a mediator and attonement by him and enableth a man to draw out the most intimate conclusions of the Gospel he doth deale with them as with men under the Gospel And the Minor or assumption is Mr. Goodwins own who in answer to that text Act. 14.16 Dispute Mr. Simpson p. 63. saith thus Although he suffered those nations to walk in their own wayes that is did not deale with them as with men under the Gospel yet he gave them such meanes as would have restrained them from their evil wayes had they been vigilant How Mr. Goodwin digladiates with himselfe sometimes that text is produced by him to prove that God deales with men as under the Gospel even the heathen and the nations whom he suffered to walk in their owne wayes and that the showes and fruitful seasons preach Christ and enable men to draw out the substance of the Gospel and yet other sometimes it is produced to no other end but to grant that God dealeth not with the nations whom he so suffers as with men under the Gospel and all the meanes that he affordeth to such tends but hitherto to restrain them from their evil wayes and that but upon this proviso if they had been diligent These do not well consist together Argum. 4 If no man hath any sufficient meanes originally given him of God to believe on Jesus Christ but onely a remote sufficiency that is such in the use whereof they may possesse themselves of sufficient means then the showres and fruitful seasons do not preach Christ nor are sufficient meanes of faith in Christ But the former is true therefore the latter is true also The strength of this Argument lyeth in this for any man to have the Gospel discovered any way Christ preached and life upon repentance brought to light is means sufficient to bring men to salvation Yea and Mr. Goodwin himselfe affirmes pag. ●5 that God giveth faith to no man but in giving these meanes to beget faith in his conference with Mr. Simpson and in this treatise of his affirmeth that a heathen man may quit himselfe to such a degree of wel-pleasing to God so as that he will not fayle to reveale Christ to him in some degree or other which shall be saving Let Mr Goodwin if here hee doe not grant that to have Christ revealed any way be sufficient meanes of believing in Christ Say what is The Minor of the Syllogisme is Mr. Goodwins owne in expresse words he saith thus I doe not meane that the Gentiles Dispute with Mr. Simpson pag. 79. or any man whatsoever hath an immediate sufficiency to believe in Christ originally given them of God but onely a remote that is so much as by the use of it they may possesse themselves of further means by which they shal have an immediate sufficient meanes to believe I doe earnestly desire that Mr. Goodwin had so much divinity as to reduce himselfe out of this labyrinth into which he hath improvidently brought himselfe for if no heathen man hath only more then a remote sufficiency to believe which he affirmes in one Treatise And that remote sufficiency to arise no higher then so much upon the use whereof they should not fayle of having Christ

revealed some way or other which he affirmeth in another Treatise then how can this be near the truth that every heathen man hath such a cleare discovery of Christ and satisfaction by him by the creatures and fruitful showres and seasons as is a sufficient meanes to bring them to faith which is the subject of this his Treatise His immediate sufficiency implyeth the discovery of Christ his mediate or remote sufficiency excludes it as actually done yet both he contendeth for to be the inheritance of every heathen man Is not Mr. Goodwin a fit man to have his mouth opened against his brethren for speaking at such a rate of contradictions and inconsistences as hee doth in his dispute with Mr. Simpson in the close of it First let him take the beame out of his owne eye and consider whether that assertion which denies any revelation of Christ to the heathen in any kind or degree until they use well that which is originally given them of God And that assertion which affirms That every heathen man in that which is originally given to him may with out any further improvement discover Christ and draw out the summe of the Gospel Bee not contradictions at a sufficient rate Argum. 5 If the Gentiles til such time as the partition wal was broken downe were without Christ aliens from the promises and without hope then the rayne and fruitful seasons did not preach Christ and life upon repentance neither were they fit or sufficient meanes of faith in Christ But the former is true therefore the latter is true also The force of this Argument lyeth in this To have the gospel preached and life upon repentance discovered and so as men are enabled to draw out the most intimate conclusions and sum of the gospel it cannot be rationally concluded that such are without Christ and without promise and without hope to be without Christ is as interpreters give it us a Sine Christo i. e. sine cognitione lege gratia vita Christi Cornel. à Lapid in loc to be without the knowledge law grace life of Christ How those that have the gospel preached can be sayd to be without Christ and those that by the showres and fruitful seasons and the sound of the heavens have the words of eternal life can be said to be without the promises and those that by these forenamed means are enabled to draw out the summe of the gospel and to discover life upon repentance can be sayd to be without hope I shall be an expectant of some of Mr. Goodwins reason to unfold It is not the evasion of Corvinus that will serve his turne who being by his adversary prest with this Text expounds it thus b Gentes fuerunt sine Christo quia Christum sibi non sperabant spem non habuisse dicuntur quia non speraverunt in promissiones Judris factas Corvin in Mol. cap. 39. §. 4. The nations were without Christ in that they did not hope in Christ and they were without hope in that they did not hope in those promises that were made to the Jews but this comes farre short of satisfaction For first these words in that they did not hope in Christ for themselves are no rational interpretation of his phrase being without Christ For their being without Christ did distinguish the Gentiles from the Jewes but it was not the want of the act of hope in Christ that distinguished the gentiles from the Jews because in this they were alike many among the Jews did not actually hope in Christ which was the cause of their final rejection but that which differenced them was their being sine fundamento spei without the foundation of hope that is the discovery of Christ in the promises And this will be more evident if we consider what it was that made them one and tooke away this difference betwixt the Jew and the Gentile not the hope of the Gentiles in the promises that were peculiar to the Jewes this was not pertinent to them as Gentiles but as Proselites but their hope in the promises made to themselves as appeares in the 13. and 17. verses where the Apostle affirms that those that were a farre off are made nigh yea and made one with them but that was by having the gospel preached to them that were a farre off as to them that were nigh Now if their onenesse with the Jew lay in this that they had the same promises of Christ in the gospel and so the same foundation of hope same specifically I mean not numerically it will follow that their difference lay in this that the Jewes had the foundation of hope in the promises but the Gentiles none so without Christ and without hope without Christ because without the knowledge of Christ without hope because without the foundation and ground of hope But how can those that have Christ preached and life upon repentance and the summe of the gospel discovered any ways be sayd in this sense to be either without Christ or without hope Neither secondly is this enough to render them in general without hope because they did not hope in the promises made to the Jewes What if they did not yet if they had discoveryes of Christ and life upon repentance and the summe of the Gospel preached some other way especially in a saving way it is enough to bespeak them not without hope which untill I receive further satisfaction must prevaile with me to think that the heathen have not such discoveries by the fruitful seasons because they are said to be without hope Argum. 5 If the word of faith and the doctrine of Christ crucified and the summe and effect of the gospel be to the Greeks foolishnesse then a natural man cannot by the help of the raine and fruitful seasons arise to any such rational discourse as to draw the intimate conclusions of the gospel thence But the former is true therefore the latter is true also The proposition of this Syllogisme I conceive is beyond Mr. Goodwins scruple because the same thing in respect of the same person and time cannot be both a rational discourse and yet foolishnesse cannot be clearely seene and yet not seen at all F●r so the Criticks in that language observe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à non videndo quasi non omnino visum The minor I conceive is beyond his scruple from the Apostles expresse 1 Cor. 1.23 1 Cor. 1.23 we preach Christ crucified to the Jewes a stumbling block and to the Greekes foolishnesse and thus it is till they come to be called by the sanctifying and enlightning spirit of God I might levy up more Scriptures as distinct arguments but I shall refer them hither which I entreate Mr. Goodwins thoughts upon as 1 Cor. 2.6 7 8. 1 Cor. 2 6 7 8. wherein the Apostle preached the summe of the gospel to them he sayd he did not preach the