A defence of the doctrine propounded by the synode at Dort against Iohn Murton and his associates, in a treatise intituled; A description what God, &c. With the refutation of their answer to a writing touching baptism. By Iohn Robinson. Robinson, John, 1575?-1625. 1624 Approx. 480 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 104 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2004-08 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A10833 STC 21107A ESTC S114366 99849592 99849592 14749 This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A10833) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 14749) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1529:04) A defence of the doctrine propounded by the synode at Dort against Iohn Murton and his associates, in a treatise intituled; A description what God, &c. With the refutation of their answer to a writing touching baptism. By Iohn Robinson. Robinson, John, 1575?-1625. [4], 203, [1] p. Successors of G. Thorp], [Amsterdam : Printed in the year, 1624. Printer and place of publication from STC. Murton's "A discription of what God hath predestinated concerning man" was published in 1620. Errata on Dd2r, final page of text. Reproduction of the original in the Bodleian Library. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Murton, John. -- Discription of what God hath predestined concerning man. Synod of Dort (1618-1619) Baptism -- Early works to 1800. 2004-04 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2004-04 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2004-05 Emma (Leeson) Huber Sampled and proofread 2004-05 Emma (Leeson) Huber Text and markup reviewed and edited 2004-07 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion A DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINE PROPOVNDED BY THE SYNODE AT DORT : AGAINST IOHN MVRTON AND HIS ASSOCIATES , IN A Treatise intuled ; A Description what God , &c. WITH THE REFVTATION OF their Answer to a Writing touching BAPTISM . By IOHN ROBINSON . Printed in the year , 1624. THE PREFACE . THE record which the Apostle bare the Iews in his time ; such as either reade these mens writings , or know their persons may bear them ; which is , that they haue a zeal of God , but not according to knowledg , I add touching them , nor in modesty neither . Which if it held any place in their hearts , as were meet , would moderate and restrain both their causlesse presumption in themselvs , and gracelesse licentiousnesse which they fear not to use , both towards God , and other men . They would seem very zealous for the Scriptures purity and perfection : vvarning all to take heed they presume not aboue what is written ; nor to add to , or diminish from the perfect law of the Lord contained therin : And yet they themselvs presume so frequently , and notoriously in this their book , to corrupt the very words of the Texts which they cite , by adding to , and taking away , and altering , for their advantage ; as I suppose , the like hath not been seen before in any , of any sect whatsoever : and as if , in truth , they meant not to use a gift to interpret the holy Scriptures , but a priviledg to correct them . A taste of this they giue us in their very Epistle , where answering an objection taken from the learning of the Synode at Dort , by Es. 29. 14 , & Math. 11. 25. 26 , they , instead of wise and prudent , which are Christs words , put learned , and that in small letters as part of the Text , both wronging therin that lawfull and helpfull learning in others , which themselvs want , and corrupting the Lords words , which they ought religiously to keep ; and obtruding another meaning then ever came into his mind : which they doe usually in this Treatise , by neglecting the main scope of the place cited , and catching at a word or phrase in it ▪ which is the highest way , that can be , to all heresie . And for men , how uncharitable are they towards them in their persons , judging them as perishing without remedie , if they receiv not their new Gospell of Anabatistry and Free-will ? How injurious in relating their own mis-formed collections , for their opinions ? And lastly , how contemptuous of their gifts and graces , how eminent soever ? As if the word of God came out from them , or to them alone . It is true , we ought not to pin our faith on the sleevs of any , nor to call any Master , as Christ speaks and means , but him alone : and no lesse true , that Christ hath given gifts to some men , for the edifying of others ; and that we ought not to look on our things alone , as if we alone had knowledg and conscience , and zeal , and soules to saue : but every man also of the things of others ( though in some things differing from them ) as having these things , as well as we : and therwith considering , that many eies see more then one , and that specially having , as so many spectacles , the advantages of knowledge of Tongues , and Arts , with daily travail in the Scripture , which in us are wanting . And thus serving God , in all modesty of minde , and being sincere in the truth in loue , we shall be much sitter , both to help others , and to be helped by them in the things agreeable thereunto . A DEFENCE OF THE DOCTRINE PROPOVNDED BY THE SYNODE AT DORT . CHAP. I. Of Predestination . ADVERSARIES . WEE hold , that before the foundation of the world , the most holy God predestinated to make the world , and man. &c. DEFENCE . NEither the Scriptures so speak ; neither is it sensibly said , that God predestinated to make the world and man &c. To predestinate , is to predetermine , or to destinate , or ordain before hand , a person , or thing to its end . God indeed purposed from eternity to make the world , and man ; but destinated it , and him , considered as ( to be ) made , to their ends . Christ as God was preordained or predestinated before the foundation of the world , and manifested in the last times for our redemption ; yet is he not of the number of persons or things made or created . Again , the glory of the grace of God , shineing in mans salvation , is a created thing , and yet not predestinated of God , nor preordained to any end , being it selfe the utmost end of all things . We see then something predestinated , and yet not made ; and something again made , and ●ot predestinated . With like incongruity they adde , that God predestinated to make man a reasonable soule , to giue him a righteous Law , and lastly , to send his sonne to purchase the very wicked , &c. which last words haue neither truth in them ( in their meaning ; ) nor sense , as they lay them down . Secondly , the Synode at Dort , against which these Adversaries deal , and all others , speaking distinctly of things , apply the decree of predestination , to reasonable creatures : and that Synode specially to men , and the same considered , as faln its Adam , and thereby made guilty of eternall death ; referring the decree of creation , and permission of the fall , to a more general work of divine providence . Their description of the elect , and reprobate may be admitmitted , in a good sense : namely , that the receiving of grace by some , argues Gods eternall election of them , as the effect doth the cause . The not receiving of this grace by others , to whom it is offered , his eternall reprobation ; that is , his not-electing , but refusing or passing by of others , as the consequent , the antecedent . Of which , more hereafter . In setting down the difference between them and us , they insinuate , as if we made God the Authour , yea , the principall Authour of all the evill of sin in the world . But as the Synode disclaims that prophane errour , so doth it justly complain of this ungodly slander : which in these men ariseth from their want of skill , to put difference between Gods working of the sinne , as authour therof ; and his appointing , and ordering both of sin , and sinner , to his own holy ends . ADVERSARIES . THe first particular against which they deal , is our affirmation , that God decreed the sinne of Adam , and that of necessity to come to passe , and consequently , all other sinnes , in their time , taking upon them with all to manifest , that herein wee not onely contradict the truth , but our own affirmation elsewhere , quoting for example , Theses Genevenses , pag. 26 , where it is affirmed , that Adam in innocency , had free-will or power , from the creation of God , not to haue sinned : which matter they also prosecute in many words , with great disorder , making the head of their discourse , Predestination ; and the body sin . DEFENCE . AS the contradiction is not in our Assertions , but in their misunderstanding : So might I , by good right , forbeare to meddle about Adams sin , in the case of predestination ; considering the determination of the Synode at Dort hereabout , which I take upon me to defend : which considers man as fallen in Gods account , as the object of the Predestination in question . But I will not use all my lawfull liberty ; but as he that will overtake and hold a malefactour , must follow him , not onely in the high and beaten way , whilst he keeps it , but in all the out-leaps also , and turnings , which he makes : So , God assisting me , purpose I ( though it be troublesome ) to follow and prosecute these Adversaries in this , and other their particular straglings , if any way pertinent to the generall controversie . I affirm then , that Gods decree , and ordination about Adams fall was such , as that the same could not but follow therupon ; not as an effect , upon a cause working it ( God forbid ) ; but as a consequent upon an antecedent ; or as an event necessarily following upon a most holy , wise and powerfull providence ; so ordering and disposing , that the same should so come to passe infallibly , though performed by Adams free , and freely working will. If any demand how this can be , that God who forbiddeth and hateth sinne , yet should so order persons and things , by his providence , and so from eternity purpose to order them , as that the same cannot but be ? I answer , by free acknowledgment , that the manner of Gods working herein is to me , and to all men , unconceiueable ; and withall avouch , that he , who will not confesse , that God can ( and could in Adams sin ) by his infinite wisedom and power , most effectually , and infallibly , in regard of such event , order and dispose of things , without violation to his holinesse , or violence to the creatures will , as no mortall man is able to conceiue the manner therof , is himselfe in a high degree , guilty of that pride , which was Adams●uine ●uine , by which he desired to be as God in knowledge . Who is able to understand the manner of Gods working , in giving the Holy Ghost to men , and in directing the tongues and pens of the Prophets infallibly , and so as they could not erre ? Much lesse discernable is Gods manner of working in , and about the creatures sinfull actions . And because many take great offence at this doctrine of truth , and work of God , I will ( the Lord assisting me ) plainly , and briefly , as I can , proue , that all events , even those most sinfull ( in regard of the creatures work in , and of them ) come to passe necessarily , after a sort , in respect of Gods providence , as being a hand steady , and which swarveth not in ordering the creature in , and unto the same . My first proofe is from Act. 2. 22. 23 , & ch . 4. 27. 28. Him ( to wit Christ ) being delivered by the determinate counsell , and foreknowledge of God , ye haue taken , and by wicked hands haue crucified , and slain . And again , Herod , Pontius Pilate , with the Gentiles , and people of Israel , were gathered together to doe whatsoever thy hand , and thy counsell determined before to be done . What words could the Holy Ghost make choise of more liuelily to expresse Gods effectuall work , according to his eternall purpose ? Here is expresly mentioned , not onely his foreknowledge ( upon which the event necessarily followeth , except God goe by guesse onely ) but his determinate counsel , yea his hand , as the effectuall instrument of working : as if the Holy Ghost should haue said , That which the heart of God unchangeably purposed s●ould be done , touching the killing of h●s Son by wicked men , that his hand powerfully ordered to be done accordingly . ADVERSARIES . THeir evasions else-where are , that God decreed to suffer them to doe that which they did , but decreed not that they should so doe , and that God might haue appointed some to sacrifice his sonne Christ , as he did Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac . And againe , that although God determined certainly that his sonne should be slain , yet he might haue been slain without sin ▪ DEFENCE . THat God suffered , and so decreed to suffer the wicked to kill his sonne , is plaine . If he had not decreed to suffer them , he had not suffered them ; if he had not suffered them , they could not haue done it : but that he onely suffered them , is against the expresse words and meaning of the text , which sayth , the wicked took him , being delivered by Gods determinato counsell . Is to deliver by determinate counsell , to suffer onely ? So where it is sayd , that Gods hand determined that which was done , it shewes that God was a doer in the businesse , and not a sufferer onely . If God onely suffered them , ( that is , hindred them not ) he had no hand in it at all , but with-held his hand from medling in it . How then could his hand and counseli determine before whatsoever was done ? Besides , if God onely suffered the death of his sonne , all the worth of our redemption by his death , vanisheth away : seeing that which God suffers onely , is onely evill , and not good . Also by this perverse exposition , neither the Father gaue his sonne , nor the sonne himselfe for us to the death , which the Scriptures every where affirme . Lastly , hee that considers the end of the Churches prayer , Act. 4. will plainly see how they meant therein to ascribe unto God more then the sole suffering of those things . The end was to comfort themselues and other Gods servants against the threatnings and rage of the wicked in all their persecutions . But what comfort ( I marvail ) can the servants of God draw from this consideration , that God suffers the wicked in rage to persecute them , and hinders them not . This were indeed rather matter of discouragement and dispaire , then of comfort unto them . But herein stands their comfort firme , that God by the hand of his providence orders all these things according to the fore-determination of the counsel of his will. Neither wil their vain imagination helpe them , that Christ might haue been slain , and become our sacrifice , yet without sinne . For howsoeevr it bee not for them , nor me , to determine what was possible to Gods absolute power ; yet we know , considering the declaration thereof both by the Scriptures and event , that in regard of Gods decree , it was necessarie that Christ should dye , as he did , by the conspiracie and rage of wicked men ; as both the expresse words , and plain drift of the places proue . Lastly , it is an erroneous presumption , that God might haue appointed some to haue sacrificed his sonne Christ , as he did Abraham to sacrifice his sonne Isaac , to wit , in obedience to Gods commandement , considering how expresly the Scriptures did even before his death , teach the contrary : and that the sonne of man must suffer many things , and be killed by the Elders and chiefe Priest. Also that Christ ought to suffer , to wit , what he had suffered , by the Priests and Rulers which had delivered him to bee condemned to death , and had crucified him : which manner of death , by being hanged upon the tree , so becoming a curse for us , that he might free us from the curse of the Law , was as well foretold by the scriptures , as his death it selfe . If that cannot but be , which the Scriptures fore-tell , and that the Scriptures fore-told that Christ must thus be killed and crucified by the hands of wicked men , then was it necessary ( and could not otherwise be ) in regard of Gods decree , that Christ should die as he did , and not without sinne in them that killed him . To conclude this place : These men granting , that God decreed the death of his sonne , but denying that he decreed the meanes and manner thereof , make the most wise God like weak man , who often resolues of a thing to bee done , but takes time to consider of the manner of doing it . Neither yet doe we , by all this , make God the appointer of evill in their meaning , that is , either the commander , or worker , or approver thereof ; but onely the supreme governour of the whole world , and of all persons and actions therein , how sinfull soever ; using and ordering the covetousnesse of Iudas , the envy of the Priests , and injustice of Pilate to this event of Christs death ; in regard of them most wicked , but of God , most gracious ; and to us , most profitable . Take we one other instance , for this purpose , from God● threatning of David by the Prophet , for his sinne against Vriah . Now therfore the sword shall never depart from thy house , &c. Behold I will raise up evill against thee out of thine own house , and I will take thy wiues before thine eyes , and giue them unto thy neighbour , and he shall ly with thy wiues in the sight of the Sunne , &c. Whence it appeares , that Absoloms practises against his father , as necessarily followed , by the work of Gods providence , as Gods threatnings going before , were necessarily true . Will they say , that God onely suffred this , and so gainsay God himselfe , saying , I will doe this , v. 12. Is to do to suffer with these men ? Tell me , you poore seduced soules , doth not the Lord here threaten a judgement from him to come upon David for his sin ? Are not all Gods judgements good and righteous ? Doth the Iudge onely suffer the punishment of the malefactors , and not inflict or procure it ? The scriptures teach , and these men acknowledge , that whatsoever is good , commeth from the father of lights : Are not Gods judgements ( wherof this is one ) good in truth , though both evill to mans sence , as this was to Davids ; and worse sometimes in the instruments both intention and action , as it was in Absoloms ? It is therefore evident , that the same thing , in divers respects , was both the horrible sin of Absolom , and the severe punishment of David , and the just judgment of God. Take a familiar similitude for the explaining of this matter . The water is of it selfe apt and prone to flow to and fro . The husbandman by h●s artificiall ditches and trenches , brings it to this or that place , in this or that measure , at this or that time , and so for other circumstances : yet doth not he at all work the disposition of flowing in the water , but finding it there , makes use of it for his purpose , and by his skill leads the water whither seems good unto him . So neither did the Lord infuse at all corrupt on into Absolom , but finding it there by the Divels and his owne work , ordered it to that his holy end , the glory of his justice in punishing the heynous sins of David : of which punishment he was the authour . These men grant , that God foreseeth all evill to come . This foresight of God they will not deny to bee certain , and that wherein God cannot be deceived . Whereupon it followes , that such evils so foreseen , necessarily and unavoydably come to passe . If any object , that Gods foresight is not the cause of the evill . I answer , no more is his decree or work of provividence about it . It sufficeth for the purpose in hand , if it follow by way of event or consequence upon the antecedent , though not of effect upon the cause . Let us yet a little further open this poynt . This knowledge , or fore-knowledge of God , is two-fold : naturall and indefinite , by which God knowes all possible things , and whatsoever in any respect , or upon any supposition , can possibly be : or definit● , and determinate , by which of things possible he knowes what shall and what shall not be . Now howsoever this fore-knowledge ( as all other things in God ) be one , and that infinite and eternall ; yet in our conception , the former of those acts of Gods fore-knowledge , goes before the decree , the latter presupposeth it . For therefore God certainly and infallibly forsees a thing shall be , because he unchangeably decrees it shall be in and according to its kind : if good , by his working it : if evill , by his suffering it , and governing the creature in working it . But you will answer , that God from eternity certainly and infallibly fore-saw Absoloms incest , because Absolom would certainly and undoubtedly practise it in time . But I would further know , whence this certainty and undoubtednesse of Absoloms such practise should arise , so as it could not possibly but be , nor God be deceived in that his prescience or foreknowledge ? It was not of any absolute necessitie of it self , that Absolom should be born : or being born , that he should be preserved , and surviue to that time : or being till then preserved , that he should haue naturall ability , and opportunitie therewith to practise that sin : seeing it was not impossible , but that David might haue taken his wiues with him , or they haue fled els whither , and haue hid themselues . In all these things God was not a meere sufferer , but a powerful worker by his providence . But suppose the being of all these things as they were ; and withall , Absoloms heart by the Divels work , and his owne , fraught with lust , and impiety this way ; yet was Absalom a changeable creature , haveing in himself freedom , or libertie of will to haue forborn that act at that time , or to haue exercised his lust upon some other object . How then could that particular event follow unchangeably from his changeable will ? How necessarily and inavoydably , from his choyce of will which was free in it self either to that act , or to another of that kinde , or to neither ? Either therefore Gods decree from eternitie ( and so his work in time ) must be acknowledged for the disposing and ordering of all events unavoydably , or his knowledge be denied in foreseeing them infallibly . Lastly , to affirme that any thing , great or small , good or evill , comes to passe in the world , without Gods providence ordering and governing it and them that doe it , is to set the creature from under the Creators rule and dominion therein ; and to shut God out of the earth , whilst men doe what they list in it , he letting them alone , and not medling with them . How Adam had power from the creation of God not to sin which they urge in the nextplace , we shal shew hereafter . In the mean while , their addition , that Gods cōmanding him not to sin , and yet his decreeing that he should sin , are contrary , as light and darknes , is faulty both in regard of our assertion , and their own . For us , we do not hold , that God decreed Adams sin , as they conceiue , that is , either to approue it , or command it , or compell unto it , nothing lesse : but this we affirm , that God decreed to leaue Adam to himself in the temptation , and not to assist him with that strength of grace , by which he could ( if he would ) haue upheld him ; and so to order both him , and all things about him , in that his temptation , as that , he , by the motion and sway of his own free-will , following his naturall appetite to the pleasant , but forbidden fruit , and that false perswasion wherewith his understanding was by Sathan overclouded , should both choose and eat the forbidden fruit . Neither are these two things contrary , that God should forbid a thing , and yet decree that it should come to passe in the manner fore-mentioned . God commanded Abraham to kill his son , as it was a tryall of his obedience : and yet decreed that the event of killing should not follow , as we know . God commanded Pharaoh , by Moses , to let Is●●●l goe ; and yet sayd before , I will harden Pharaohs heart , that he shall not let the people goe . That which he sayd , he decreed and pu●pos●d . Christ our Lord desired to drink of that bitter cup appointed him , and to be baptised with that bapt●sme , and was pained till it were accomplished : and yet desired in an other respect , that the same cup might passe from him , and he not drink of it , if it were possible . These things may well stand together in their severall respects , and are not as light and darknesse to any , but to them , whose light is darknesse . Next , they take upon them to impugne the received distinction of Gods revealed and secret will ; and demand , If it be Gods secret will , how we come to know it ? I answer , by his revealing it afterwards , either by his word , or by his work . When a thing comes to passe in this or that manner ( though before not so much as insinuated in his Word , and therfore secret ) we then know that it was the will of God it should so come to passe , either by his working it according to its kinde , if it be good ; or by his suffering and ordering it , and the worker therof , if evill . It is true which they adde , that Gods revealed will , was not revealed but hidden , before it was revealed . But what then ? There was then , say they , two hidden wils in God contrary to each other : wherof the one willed ; yea , decreed Adam to sinne , and the other willed him not to sin , and so by consequence , a good will , and an evill will. I answer , that the will of God in him , and its selfe , is but one , and the same most simple ; but by us conceived of , as divers , according to the diversity of objects upon which it is set . Secondly , we doe not say , that God willed Adams sin immediately , but that he willed the suffering and ordering of both the sinne and sinner in sinning . Thirdly , the willing and nilling of the same thing in divers respects , makes not two contrary wills , as the Scriptures last cited manifest ; but the willing and nilling of the same thing i● the same respect , makes the contrariety . ADVERSARIES . THey make us further to say , that God willeth justice for its selfe , and sin , not for sin , but that he might either haue praise in pardoning or punishing sin : and thereunto frame answer , that to pardon or punish sinne , is not to will sinne ; and that if God willeth sinne in any respect , why doth he punish it in Adam , and all his posterity ? DEFENCE . BVT who hath sayd , that God wils sin , though not for sin ? We know that the object of mans will is onely good in appearance , and of Gods in truth . We doe not then say , that God wils sin properly , though he will the thing which in regard of the creature is sin : but in regard of him either a most holy and wise tryall of the creature , or just punishment of former sins , either their own that practise it , or others : so Absoloms wicked sin , was Gods just punishment upon David . So the reprobate minde , vile affections , and all unrighteousnesse of the Gentiles , was a meet recompence from God of their error , in not glorifying him as God in the things which they clearly saw in the creation of the world . They cannot here hide themselues in their burrow of Gods bare suffering , considering how expresly it is sayd , that God gaue them up to vile affections , and as a just Iudge recompenced thereby their former sins , to wit , as otherwise , so by ordering that corruption which was in , and of themselues , to this fearfull event of a reprobate mind . The things which they ad about mens , how much more Gods speaking the truth from his heart ; and their bold charge of others with blasphemie , in making God ( to be blessed for ever ) an hypoorite , I passe by as a fruit of that spirit which makes men presumptuous , self-willed , and not afrayd to speak evill of the things which they know not themselues , nor will learn of others . The Lord , who taught Paul , that he , who being a Pharisee , and in his ignorance had accounted Christs doctrine blasphemy , had himselfe blasphemed ; shew these men the like mercie : for they know not what they speak . ADVERSARIES . IN the next place , to shew how free Adam was from all necessitie of sinning , they at large relate how God furnished him with all things that might support him in the estate in which hee created him . DEFENCE . THE particular helps mentioned , I acknowledge with them , but with limitation of some of them , which they set down at a large adventure . Whereas in the third they affirm , that Adam had a meet help and comfort for him , his wife Hevah . This is true of her created state , but not of that which followed , she ( being first seduced by the serpent , taking advantage upon her womanly weaknesse , and the absence of her husband ) becoming the onely imediate instigator of him to sin . So for the 7 th . and last , which is , that God gaue Adam will and power not to haue eaten , we confesse it , but not as they mean it , in their more overly considerations , and peremptoric determinations , then is meet , in this deep mystery . Let us therefore a little more distinctly consider , how it may and ought to be granted , that God furnished Adam with all necessarie and sufficient grace and helps , against sin , and for perseverance in holinesse . First then , we confesse , that God making him a reasonable creature , bestowed upon him withall whatsoever grace was sufficient and necessarie , on his part ; that is , as much ( and more ) then he was bound to giue him . Secondly , that God gaue him whatsoever was sufficient for his preservation in that state of holinesse and integritie in which he was created , out of the case of temptation . Thirdly , I grant , that whatsoever grace he wanted for the resisting of the temptation , when it came , it was by his own default , and that if hee had not failed himself , the grace of God would and should haue sustained him therein also . Notwithstanding all this , the event manifested , that Adam had not the grace to withstand the temptation of the serpent by the woman , but was seduced thereby . It was nothing but want of grace in him not to withstand it : and this grace he could not haue but by his gift , from whom every good gift , and every perfect giving commeth down , even the father of lights . God gaue him will actually onely to good , but changeably ; and power to understand and do whatsoever concerned him if he would : But now that constancie of will upon clear understanding and unchanged purpose of heart , which was requisite in so great a temptation ( by so subtile an adversarie in an object so pleasing to nature , and good in it selfe , together with the perswasion of his wife , so neere unto him ) this grace , I say , Adam received not of God , as the event in the changing of his will upon deceitfull information of his understanding , blinded by an appearing good , made it too manifest ; though as before I sayd , through his owne default , in not depending upon God as he ought . The things which they annex , that God gaue not Adam a Law to ensnare him ; but that that law was holy and good ; that Adam was the son of God by creation ; that if men , who are evill , do good unto their children , and would not beget them to misery ; how much lesse hath the good God created his Sonne to sinne and misery ? As also , that sinne is the defacing of Gods image in man , we willingly acknowledge ; and withall whatsoever can be rightly gathered therefrom . We beleeue that the end of Adams creation in regard of himselfe was holinesse , and happinesse ; in regard of God , the glorious manifestation of his power , wisedom , holinesse and goodnesse ; and that sinne came in by accident , and misery by sin ; man by his free , but corrupted will , willing the sin ; and God by his just and holy will , the punishment ; and that sin was in no sense the destinated end of Gods creation ; nor misery , but by accident , as to come for sin . Yet must the difference here be held ( howsoever these men tumble all together ) between God ( Adams , and all mens father by creation and his children ) and between naturall parents , and their children . God was Adams absolute father , and Lord ▪ though not for the use of any unjust power ; men are but fathers as it were by borrowing , and with a power limited by Gods will. 2 God workes , and orders all things for himselfe , yea , even the wicked for the evill day , and of him , and through him , and to him are all things . So doe not earthly parents beget and order their children for themselues , as their utmost , and highest end . 3 Earthly parents are bound not to suffer their children to sinne , if they can hinder it ; but to doe whatsoever they possibly can , being lawfull , to keep them from sin and misery . Will these free Burgesses , of their own chusing , make a Parliament-law to binde God to doe whatsoever he possibly can to keep from sinning men and Angels ? Lastly , earthly parents would rather ( had they before known it ) never haue begotten their children , then that they should ( though meerly by their own default ) haue come to sin and misery therby without remedy . But God ( even our Adversaries being Iudges ) foreknew these things of men , and yet created them notwithstanding . ADVERSARIES . HEre , upon question moved , whether God could not haue made Adam so as he could not haue been deprived of his state of righteousnesse ; and whether any thing can be done against Gods will : they undertake to manifest two things ; 1 in what state God made Adam ; 2 that many things are done against the will of God. For the first , they in their bold ignorance , hold it an ignorant conceit , that God could haue made Adam unchangeable : that is , so haue made , and kept him as he should not , nor could haue been deprived of his state of righteousnesse , in which he was made . For this , say they , had been to haue made him God like himselfe : and so conclude , that God could not haue made man otherwise then he made him , a reasonable creature , yet changeable : 2 that then it had been to no purpose , to haue set a penalty to the Law : 3 that then the most holy attributes of God , his justice to punish sin , and mercy to forgiue it , had been voyd . DEFENCE . THey , who here desire , that what they say may be well observed , should themselues better haue observed what they say , then thus , as they doe , to deceiue both themselues , and others , by an equivocation of words . Here then in the first place , a distinction must be put , which is , that a thing is unchangeably good , either in , and by it selfe , and so God onely is unchangeable ( and so onely hath immortality , and is onely wise , &c. ) or a thing unchangeable by the grace and power of God communicated with the creature ; and so God could , if he would , haue made Adam unchangeable , or kept him unchanged , which is the same , in the present consideration : as he hath made the Angels and soules of men immortall , and both Angels and men wise in their kinde , by communication of the effects of his being , and wisedom with them . God then is onely unchangeably good by nature , and of hims●lfe ; yet by his grace and power , it was possible for Adam to haue been kept unchangeably good , so as he should not haue sinned , which is the unchangeablenesse in question . And this answereth their first reason . To the second also , I answer , that God making Adam changeably good by created nature , might ( had it seemed so good to his infinite wisedom ) haue kept him by grace from possibility of breaking his righteous Law , in our meaning , notwithstanding tho annexing of the penalty , and that to great good purpose ; viz. both to shew how God hates all transgressing of his Law , against the breach whereof he denounceth such judgement ; and also , as a meanes ( by his blessing and grace ) effectually for the keeping of Adam from breaking it : which use also it should haue had , if Adam had done his duety in constant obedience , and that God , by his most powerfull grace had so preserved him , that he had not sinned . For the third Reason : First I demand , what necessity there was that God should haue use ( as they speak ) towards men of the attributes of his justice to punish sin , and of his mercy to pardon it upon repentance ? Would it haue been any diminution of his perfection , and happinesse if he had not so done ? Doth not the glory of God also even most brightly shine in the elect Angels , which haue been and shall be kept unchangeably holy and without sin for ever ? and in regard of whom those holy Attributes , of justice in punishing , and mercy in pardoning haue no use . But obserue ( good Reader ) how these men are taken inavoydably in their own snare . It is not mans being made changeable , and such as might sin , by which their could come to be use of Gods attributes of justice for the punishing of sin ; and mercy for the pardoning of it ; except withall man become actually changed , and sinfull . Can there be use of justice for punishing , or of mercy for foregiuenesse of sin , but where sin is ? Their reason therfore ( if it bear weight ) proues not onely that man might possibly , but that he must sin necessarily . Which I lay down and apply formally thus . That without which the Attributes of Gods justice to punish sinne , and of his mercy to pardon it , had been utterly without use towards men , that must necessarily be : but without mans sinning , the attributes of Gods justice to punish , and of his mercy to pardon , had been utterly without use towards men : ergo , man must necessarily sin , by just consequence upon their antecedent . Their reasons thus answered , I will plainly proue that God could , if it had so pleased him , haue kept Adam unchangeably good ; as the Angels , and soules of men are , and bodies shall be ( at the resurrection ) unchangeably immortall . And first , the Scriptures teach us to giue this honour to the power of God , as to beleeue , that our God in the heaven doth ( and therefore can doe ) whatsoever pleaseth him : and so could ( had it pleased him , and been his will ) haue preserved Adam from sinning against him . Of their distinction of Gods will we shall speak by and by . If in the mean while they except , that God could not so will ; I would know the reason of their such presumption . If they say , there are some things which God cannot doe , as to lie , to deny himselfe , to make the same thing to be , and not to be , at the same time , and the like , inferring either impotence in the Creatour , or contradiction in the creature . I demand , what had there been herein against the nature either of the Creator , or creature , if God by his grace , had kept the understanding of Adam from being overclowded with errour , or false opinion , and therewith his will and affections in the integrity of obedience ? This had not been ( as some imagine ) to destroy ; but to perfect his nature . Hath not God so kept the elect Angels without all change from their primitiue purity ? Was not the Lord Iesus in his Manhood so kept upon earth ? And shall not all the elect be so kept for ever in heaven ? These are , were , and shall be unchangeably righteous ; and yet were not , nor are , nor shall be made Gods. They themselues confesse , that the devils are unchangeable in evill ; And why then might not both Angels and men be unchangeable in good ? that is , so kept by the power of God as they never turn from their goodnes . Or what barre would these men haue put against the power of God , if his will had been so to haue preserved and kept Adam ? I demand , whether the Apostles , in their time , could possibly preach any thing but the truth , being immediately and infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost ? All these instances serue to proue , that it is possible to God , if it please him , so to assist and confirm by his Spirit , a reasonable creature ( though of a changeable nature in its selfe ) as that in regard of the same divine assistance , it is not possible it should be changed from good to evill , or sin against God. Lastly , if God could not haue so made and ordered Adam , as that he could not haue sinned , then God did not so much as suffer him to sinne , seeing none can be said properly to suffer a thing to be done , saue he that could hinder it , if he would . It were absurdly said , that I suffer the wind to blow , or sea to swell , though I hinder them not , seeing it is not in my power to hinder them . ADVERSARIES . THey add from Ezech. 18 , & 33 , Gods asseveration , that as he liues , he would haue no man transgresse , and so come under the exequution of his justice : making withall , a short description of the will of God , as they call it : and ever confounding these two things ; necessity and compulsion : and Gods not decreeing , with his forcing men to sinne , DEFENCE . FOr better answering , and understanding of the answer unto these things , it must be considered ; first , that the will of God , though simple , and one in its nature , yet exerciseth it selfe diversly , in regard of divers objects . The first and weakest degree of Gods willing ( to speak of God as man is able to conceiu of him ) is that by which he wills the permission or suffering of sin , as sin . For if God suffer it , he suffers it willingly , seeing he both takes knowledge of it , and could hinder it by his omnipotent power , if he pleased . The second degree of Gods willing , is that by which he commands a thing to be done , and approues of it , if it be done . The third and last degree is , that according to which he workes all things by his omnipotent power . And if a man whose will is finite , yet can will things according to those degrees ; how much more both possible and easie is it to Gods infinite will , to exercise it selfe more intensly or remisly , according to those degrees ? I may be willing , in cases , to suffer that in another which I approue not of : so may I command my servant or child to doe a thing , and approu of it , if it be done , and yet not so will it , as to use all the power that possibly I can , to haue it done . Some things , again , there are that I so will , as that I doe , or am bound to use all my possible skill and power to haue them effected . These things are much more rightly said of God , considering the infinite largenesse of his will , compared with my straitnesse . The same may be said of the Spirit of God which is one ( for there is one Spirit ) whose operation yet is divers , and the same sometimes more , and sometimes lesse forcible : as we see in the knowledge of an Apostle , compared with the knowledge of an ordinary Minister or Christ●an ; and many other waies . And these differences of the will of God in the exercising of itselfe towards the creature , I desire the Reader here carefully to obseru for after use . Their short definition , as they unskilfully call it , of Gods will , by which he either wils what man is to doe , or what he will doe in himselfe , is short indeed , as cutting off all that God will doe and doth out of himselfe , and in the creature , as are all his workes ad extra , as they are called . It remaines , that in the next place , we shew the difference between necessity and compulsion ; and Gods decreeing in our sense , and his forcing of things , ( which our Adversaries with great errour confound as the same ) and withall , that things may , after a sort , be done necessarily , and freely too . Freely , yea contingently also , in regard of men , and necessarily in regard of Gods work of providence according to his decree . I mention Gods work according to his decree ; because to speak properly , Gods decree or will , works not things , but his power according to his will. There is indeed a necessity which takes away freedom and voluntarinesse from men ; but then they rather suffer then doe . For example , the striking or thrusting of a man with such violence , as that he is compelled thereby to stagger or fall : this necessity of compulsion depriues me of all freedom to this bodily motion , so as I stagger or fall unwillingly ; but this comes from an externall principle or beginning working violently , and from without me . But this is nothing to that other necessity in regard of God , causing and effecting the good , in and by the creature , according to its kinde ; and suffering and ordering the evill person and thing , according to its kind ; with which mans freedom may well stand . And first , whatsoever God doth , he doth it both most freely , and most necessarily well . So the elect Angels doe the will of God most voluntarily , and yet most necessarily . So did Christ , as man , the will of his Father so freely , as none can doe any thing more ; and yet as necessarily , as it was necessary for God not to sinne . On the contrary , the devils doe evill , both most necessarily ( being by these mens own grant , unchangeably evill ) and yet most willingly , as carryed thereunto withall their power . Christ saith , it must needs be that offences come ; and the Apostle , that there must be heresies in the Church . If then freedom of will can stand with no manner of necessity , the authours of these heresies and offences sinne not therin : for all sinnes specially of this kinde are voluntary . I add in the last place , that the better any man , or Angell is , he doth good the more , both necessarily and willingly : and the worse any , evill , both waies . Neither will it seem strange unto us , that one and the same action comes under so divers considerations , as in one regard , to be voluntary , contingent and casuall ; and in another , necessary : if we consider , how divers agents concur and meet together in producing it . No work of man , is so mans alone , as that God hath not some hand in it , in sustaining and ordering the person and work , yea in effecting that which is good in it , as all that is , which hath in it any created being or order . What hinders then , but that the same thing may in regard of man as the particular and immediate cause , be voluntary and contingent ; and yet in regard of God the highest and generall cause , necessary ? We daily see the truth of this in proportion amongst men ; the meeting of Ahab and Eliah was in respect of Ahab , casuall ; but in respect of Eliah , of destinate counsell . These things thus cleered , we will come to the exposition of the words of Ezechiel , so oft and vehemently urged by these men , and others ; which are , that God takes not pleasure in the death of a sinner , but that he turn from his way and liue . I answer ; first , that the Lord takes no delight in the death of a sinner , that repents , and turns from his wicked way : but otherwise , if the sinner repent not , the Lord takes delight in his death ; not for the misery of the creature , but for the glory of his justice shining therin . Of such the Lord testifies , that he wil laugh at their calamity , & mock when their fear cometh . And considering , that the death , and destruction of the wicked is Gods own just and holy work , for their sins , who will deny that God delights in it ? Secondly , for sinne , who was ever so wicked as to imagine that God takes pleasure in it ? It pleaseth him for his holy ends , to suffer sin , and to order the creature sinning by his own freewill , & election of evil , as hath been formerly proved . Thirdly , it must be noted that the Prophet speaks there of such sinners onely , as to whom the word comes ; saying , Turn yee , turn yee from your evill waies , for why will yee die , ô house of Israel ? Whence we doe gather evidently these two particulars . First , that the Prophet doth not here speak of all men universally , ( as they conceiu ) but onely of the house of Israel , or of such , as to whom he● sends his Prophets to call them to repentance : secondly , that he speaks not of that decree of the Lord willing , which is accompanied with the powerfull work of his grace , by which hee will giue repentance to wicked men , instructed in the truth by his servants : but onely of that degree of his will which stands in commanding that which is good , and in approving of it , if it be performed . And so we grant it to be the Lords pleasure and will , that all repent to whom the Word is preached . It is true which they add : that Adam and others sinned against the will of God , but not that any ever sinned against the secret will of God , as they affirm . The will of God is no law to man till it be revealed ; and where there is no law , there is no transgression . It is also truely sayd , that the Iewes unwillingnesse to be gathered to Christ , was against Gods and Christs will : that is , his commanding will : for he would , that is , commanded , and they would not , but disobeyed : but that it was against that decree of Gods willing , which sets his almightie power awor● , that I deny . For God could , if thus he would , haue giuen them repentance , and drawn them to his son . Whatsoever he thus wills , he can do . That which they add ( as an eye-salue to cure our blindnes ) namely , that we haue nothing to do with Gods secret wil , not revealed in his word , is true in regard of our obedience to God , & expectation from him ▪ but not absolutely , as they conceiue . The particular events of things in the world , though not so much as insinuated in the scriptures , concern us when they come to passe , so as we may and ought to say , it was the will of God they should so be : either his will to work them , if good : or to suffer and order them and their doers , if evill . ADVERSARIES . NExt comes into consideration a speciall distinction of ours , which is , that God is the author of the action , or fact , but not of the sin of the fact or crime . Over which they insult , and in it over all learned men , though they mention Calvin onely , with high contempt and great triumph before the victory ; calling it a merely fabulous ridle , and marvellous sophistication ; telling us that a spade is a spade , &c. but in truth shewing themselues sitter to medle with a spade and a mattock , then with those high mysteries . Let us see their reasons . In the first whereof they make us say ; that God is the author of the very fact and deed of Adams sin , yea of adultery , theft , murder , &c. DEFENCE . WE deny their charge , and answer by distinction ; that Adams taking and eating the forbidden fruit , Davids adultery , Ioahs murther , and the like , are to be considered two waies : First , naturally , and as they are motions in nature , performed by mans natural & created faculties and powers of soul and body : secondly , morally , as those motions are misapplyed , and abused to wrong objects , by mans blinde mind and corrupt will. In the former respect , & materially , as we speak , they are of God and created nature ; in the latter and formally , of mans proper corruption . Now the sinne is not the naturall action of motion , but the pravity and abuse of the action . The subtilty of our riddle , they , as if they had plowed with our heyfer , find out to be this , that in our account sinne is nothing , and that God , though the authour of all things , is not the authour of sin , for sin is nothing ; and so the thiefe , and other malefactors , is punished for nothing by the Iudge : and the wicked for nothing in everlasting fire . First , I demand of these men , whether , if God command something to be done , and men doe it not , they deseru not to be punished for their doing of nothing ? Is it not sinne not to doe that wee should doe ; and to doe nothing when we should doe something ? These witty men could teach the goats ●t Christs left hand , at that day , to answer him to the full , that bee condemned them to hell fire for nothing ; for not to doe is to doe nothing . We then answer , first , that we call not sin nothing negatiuely , but privatiuely , as a want of that which should be ; secondly , that sin is not nothing morally , that is not nothing against Gods Law , for sin onely is something against it , but nothing naturally ; that is , nothing which hath a created being in nature . So , for their next Argument , that by authority of Scripture , & our own description , sin is a thought , word or deed , contrary to the will of God , and therefore that the deed is sin ; they should consider , that neither the Scriptures nor writers meaning is , that th● sin stands not in the naturall deed or motion , but in the contrariety which the same deed ▪ or motion hath in it to the law of God. Darknes , or a shadow , are nothing positiuely , but onely the want of light . The voydnes , darknes , and unformednes on the earth and deep , in the beginning , were nothing that had reall being ; but onely the want of that form , furniture , and light , which God afterward made , and furnished them withall . When the candle is put out , and it becomes dark ; shall we think that any reall thing comes into the house , and causes the darknes ? or when I make a shadow by standing in the light , or Sun-shine ; do I put any reall thing in the place where the shadow is ? or do I not onely keep the light and Sun-shine from it ? Likewise , when a man or beast halts in going , shall we imagine that the halting is the very motion of going , or the fault of the motion onely ? So is sin onely the absence & want of that conformity and agreeablenesse which ought to be in the thought ▪ word , or work of the reasonable creature to the Law of God ; which as none of understanding and sincerity will deny ; so for further satisfaction of the doubting , and conviction of the refractory , I will annex certain most plain and undoubted proofes of Scripture to confirme the same . First , the Apostle quoting and confirming the saying of the heathen Poet , witnesseth to the Athenians , that in God we liue and moue , and haue our being . Our being then , that is , our souls and bodies , and our life arising from their union ; and so our motions arising from our life we haue of God ; yea which is more , after a sort , in him , who filleth all things with his presence . Where let it also be noted , that he speakes of the being , life , and motions of the very prophane and heathenish Idolaters , as well as of any others . Secondly , God , as it is in the Psalm , made the heavens and earth , and sea , and all that in them is . If sin then be any thing , ( viz. any thing having being ) God made it , and so it is his creature . And surely if it haue a being , it is either a created or uncreated being . Not the latter , for that is onely God ; and therefore the former by their ground . If God created all things that are , sin if it be in their sense , must be Gods creature . Thirdly , the same naturall motion of man in which great sin is committed , if it were exercised upon another object , might be without sin , and lawfull ; and therefore not the very action or motion , but the misapplying of it , is the sin ; from which the action hath its morall , but not its naturall being . For example ; the very same naturall motion which Adam used in takeing and eating the forbidden fruit , upon any other fruit , had been no sin . The same naturall act in which David practised adultery with Bethsaba , with his lawfull wife , had been no adultery : the very same naturall act and motion whereby Ioab killed Abner , and Amasa , if exercised upon a malefactor at the magistrates command , had been no murther , but a work of iust execution . The sinne therefore is not in the very act , but in the misapplying it , or other vitious adjunct . Fourthly , considering that there is no sin in deed or action of body , which was not first in the faculties of the soule , the understanding , will and affections : ( for onely the things which come from the heart , desile the man ) the outward sin in fact and deed can no more more make the outward action in itselfe not to be of God ; then the inward corruption can make the created faculties in which it is , not to be of God. It is sencelesse to doubt but that when a wicked man sleepeth , and so practiseth no wickednesse one way or other , he is notwithstanding a wicked man. And where now resteth his wickednesse , but in his heart ? And what is his heart but the faculties of his understanding , will and affections , which sin possesseth and corrupteth ? And yet nevertheles these naturall faculties remain Gods good creatures ; so do their motions naturall , notwithstanding sins possessing them . There is in our sinfull nature , the faculty , and the sin or disorder in it : and in our sinfull works , the action from the faculty , and the outward sinne in it , from the inward sinne in the other . Lastly , I thus argue unresistably : That which God blesseth is good , and of himselfe : This none will deny . I assume . But God blesseth the natural action , or motion , in which horrible sin is practised . This is most evident ( amongst a thousand daily instances ) in the sinfull commixture of Iudas and Thamar , being on his part whoredom , and on hers incest , though with a better minde : Yet this action ( considered naturally ) God blessed with a childe ; yea , with two sonnes ; yea , with him , on whom Christ came according to the flesh , who is blessed for ever . Here is plainly the action blessed , and therfore good ( in our sense ) and of God ; and yet the sin in the action , evill and accursed . The meaning of Mr. Knox , in saying , that what Ethnicks ascribe to fortune , we acknowledg to come from God , as the appointer of the things , they mistake and pervert , neither understanding the Ethnicks meaning , nor his . The Heathens speaking of fortune did not conceiu that there was any such divine power causing things to be , but the contrary , and that things come to passe without any divine Providence ordering them , and meerly by blinde chance or fortune : when they spake of good fortune , or ill fortune , they meant onely the good or ill hap of persons , or things . His and our meaning then is , that which Christ our Lord also teacheth , that Not a sparrow falls to the ground without Gods providence . And where hee speaks of God as the Authour , by his counsell appointing all things to the one part , and to the other ; it is plain hee intends it onely of the ordering and governing of them , which they that deny , doe in effect , pluck God out of heaven , by denying his Soveraignty , and power over all his creatures in ordering them , and all their actions , to his own supernaturall ends . The bitter curses which here they break into in their ignorant zeal against him , and Calvin , and with them , all others , the worthy instruments of restoring the Gospels light , after the darknesse of Popery ( into which these men are slidden back in no small measure ) are like stones thrown upward by them , which without their answerable repentance will fall down upon their own heads . Their proofe , that God is gracious and mercifull , of whom all good things come , and none evill , are needlesse , seeing wee grant as much ; onely wishing them to consider these three things . First , that the most of these Scriptures cited , mean onely the mercy and loue of God to his Church and people . Secondly , with what mind they put once and again , moving for tempting , Iam. 1. Thirdly , that 2 Pet. 3. 4 , is not to be extended to all , as it is by those prodigall Stewards of Gods grace , but to the elect onely , whom the Apostle opposeth to the mockers mentioned v. 3 , and therefore saith , that the Lord which hath promised , is patient towards us , and so deferres that his comming till the number of the elect be accomplished , by their effectuall calling . Of Gods suffering , and doing things , and how they come to passe thereupon , I haue spoken before , answering what they object therabout . Onely I may not passe by , without giving warning therof , the stumbling stone of most grievous errour and impiety , which they ( pur-blind people ) cast in their own way , making Gods purposes and promises no better , in effect , then the vizzard of Stage-players , which they put on , and off again , at every turn . ADVERSARIES . THeir affirmation , that God from the beginning of the world knoweth all things , yet that all things come not to passe therfore necessarily ; alledging for that purpose , Math. 26. 35 , is dangerous , if they speak to the matter in hand , and with respect to the Text , whose word , for the most part , they bring : Known unto God are all his workes from the beginning of the world . Their instance in Christs asking twelu Legions of Angels , Mat. 26 , Ananias his keeping his possession , and the saving of the ship in which Paul sayled : These Scriptures , together with Sauls coming to Keilah , and the men of Keilahs delivering David into his hands , 1 Sam. 23 , they bring to proue , that although God doe foreknow things will come to passe , and also foretell them , yet they may be prevented : adding hereunto ▪ that the Lord knoweth , and pronounceth , that the wicked shall be damned , and yet there lyeth no necessity upon their damnation , but that it may be prevented by repentance . DEFENCE . FIrst , these examples of the Lords sending the twelue Legions of Angels , and of Sauls comming to Keilah , and the like , are not to the purpose in hand . The question is ( as they themselues put it ) of things coming not of fortune , but by Gods providence , and of Gods willing things that come to passe , both good and evill . To what end then mention they things that never did , nor shall come to passe , either good or evill ; And so to cover their craft the better alter the words of the Text , All Gods workes , into All things . And what are all these things with them ? Christs obtaining 12 legions of Angels , Ananias retaining his possession ; the saving of the ship in which Paul sayled towards Rome : Sauls coming to Keilah , and the destruction of the Ninivits within 40 daies : which were neither works of God , nor man ; nor never were nor shall be . So then by all Gods works , as the text saith , and matter in hand requireth ; and by all things as they say , they must mean plain nothing , and that which never was , nor shall be . Secondly , the Scriptures cited by them , rightly understood ; are to them as Goliahs sword to him ; cleerly cutting off the head of their errour . Take for instance one or two of them , upon which they most insist . For Math. 26 , it was a thing in itselfe possible , considering Gods loue to his Sonne , and his faith in him , that he should haue obtained those Legions of Angels to haue reskued him : So was it also , not onely possible in it selfe , for Saul , but also in his minde to haue come to Keilah &c. And whence then was it , that these things came not so to passe , and had not their answerable events ? Even from the decree and providence of Gods ordering things the other way inevitably . In the former instance we haue Christs own testimony , who , after mention of his such praying , if he would , v. 53 , adds v. 54 , But then how shall the Scriptures be fulfilled , that thus it must be ? As if he should haue sayd , it agrees well with the interest which I haue in my Fathers loue , that I should obtain from him an invincible Army of heavenly Souldiers for the reskuing of me out of mine enemies hands : but the Scriptures ( manifesting the purpose and decree of God ) haue foretold the contrary ; and that I should thus be oppressed , and afflicted , and made an offering for sin : which before he also professed to be the will of his Father , v. 39. 42. So for Sauls coming to Keilah , it was a thing in it selfe possible , and also Sauls purpose , and this the Lord saw , and foretold , but hindred by his providence in sending away David , as he had fore-purposed in his counsell to doe , and therby to hinder Sauls coming thither . These men should haue said thus , that God , alwaies fore-seeing , and sometimes fore-telling , what in regard of the nature of the things might be , and in respect of the disposition of the persons would be , if they were not prevented ; yet doth prevent them effectually by the work of his providence interposed , according to the decree of his will. And this , so farre as it looks towards the thing in hand , makes against them , avowing a most powerfull work of Gods providence , according to a most constant will , over-ruling all dispositions of persons , and events of things . But for them to say bluntly , as they doe , that God fore-knows and fore-tels that things will come to passe , and yet that those things may be prevented , is to accuse the Lord himselfe , both of want of wisedom in discerning ; and of truth in speaking , and of power in working . If any object , that God saith , Saul will come to Keilah , I easily answer , that God therin onely fore-tels what was in Sauls will and purpose ; which compared with the event , shews that Sauls purpose of will was alterable , not Gods , in whom there is neither change , nor shadow of changing ; neither is he as man that he should repent . So the threatning of the Ninivits , as divers other particular , both threatnings and promises , are but upon condition , sometimes expressed , and sometimes understood . It is ignorantly said , that a thing will be which is promised or threatned conditionally , except it be presupposed that the condition will be first . Alike impious ( as accusing God , both of being deceived and deceiving ) is that which followeth , that God knows , and pronounceth , that the wicked shall be damned , and yet that there is no necessity of it , but that it may be prevented by repentance . This is to say , that God knowes , and saies a thing shall be , when it may not be ; yea , when he knows it shall not be , as in them that doe repent afterwards . If they say further , that wicked men may and shall be saved if they repent , they say but as the truth is : but if thereupon they conclude of all simply , that therfore they may either repent , or be saved , they erre , not knowing the nature of a conditionall proposition : in which it is sufficient , if the consequence or latter part follow truely upon the antecedent or former part ; though it may be , that neither consequent nor antecedent can possibly be . For example , 1 Cor. 15. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 19 , If there be no resurrection from the dead , then is Christ not risen , and your faith is also in vain , &c. The consequence is firm , If this , then that , and yet neither this nor that apart , nor both together could possibly be . ADVERSARIES . THese men having , as they list , vilified Gods infallible knowledg , and unchangeable truth , come to his counsell , against which ( say they ) things may be done , as Luk. 7. 30 , the Pharises did against the counsell of God : adding , that Christ knew those he admonished should perish , if they repented not ; yet there lay no necessity of their perishing because Christ knew it , for as be testifieth , repentance might help it . DEFENCE . IN the former place they commit the fallacie of equivocation , taking the word counsell there for the internall and eternall decree of God in himself ; When by it , Act. 7. is meant onely the outward instructions and exhortations ministred by Iohn Baptist. Of salvation upon condition of repentance , I spake even now that which is sufficient , to which the Reader may look back . Comming to answer certaine scriptures , they begin with Prov. 16. 4. which they set down thus , God created all things for his owne sake , yea the wicked for the day of destruction , and so corupt the text whilst they pretend the opening of ●t : for it is not sayd , that God created , but that he made , that is , wrought , or did all things , as Psal. 11. 3. & 15. 2. and generally wheresoever the word is used . They therefore like unskilful workmen make themselues labour , and loose it when they haue done , in proving that God created all men good , and none bad . Neither is it wholly true , much lesse the whole truth , which they conclude as the meaning , that man becomming evill , God made the day of destruction for him , or him for the day of destruction , as a iust recompence . For first , is it not all one ( as they make it ) to say , that man is made for the day of destruction , and the day of destruction for man ; seeing the one imports the Lords work in or upon the person for the thing , and the other in or upon the thing for the person . Secondly , they misse the meaning of the place ; which is , that all things in the world , yea wicked men ▪ who seem to liue without all compasse , yet come under the divine ordination ; and that as there is nothing so casuall in regard of men , no not the casting of a lot , nor falling of a sparrow upon the ground , but comes under the Lords disposition and providence : so there is no person , nor thing in the world so evill , but he rules and over-rules it , as it may serue for the manifestation of his glory . ADVERSARIES . VNto the instances brought by us to proue Gods holy work , in and about mens sinfull works , and Satans with them : for example , Gods bidding Shemei curse David ; His stretching out his hand upon Iob , and taking away all that he had ; His moving David to number Israel ; sending a lying spirit upon Ahabs Prophets , and the like : to all these they haue their ready and round answer , that God onely suffered all these things , and that Satan and evill men were the workers of them . DEFENCE . BVT first let the godly Reader , who will not oppose his own fleshly reason against the wisdom of God , wel weigh the most effectuall and significatiue terms that possibly can be used by the Holy Ghost every where , to shew the Lords powerfull work in those matters , and not his bare sufferance ; as if he were onely an idle looker on , letting men alone without medling with them , in a great part of the greatest , even all the evill works of their liues : For example , that God sent Ioseph into Egipt , and not his brethren ; that he hardened Pharaohs heart , and raised him up to shew in him his power , &c. that the Lord gaue , and that the Lord took away from Iob ; that God bade Shimei curse David ; that he moved David against Israel , to say , Go number Israel and Iudah : that he put a lying spirit in the mouth of Ahabs prophets : that Asshur was a staffe in the Lords hand , and the rod of his anger : that he sent strong delusions upon them that received not the loue of the truth ; and lastly , ( to let passe infinite other places ) that God by his determinate counsell and foreknowledge , delivered Christ into the hands of wicked men ; and that they did what Gods hand and counsell had determined before to be done . Now , can we conceiu it to be for no more but a simple suffering , that the Holy Ghost , who knew right well how to speak , should not once , nor twice , but I may safely say , a thousand times in the Scriptures , use words and phrases importing so effectuall operation and working ? Is to send men , to take away things , to raise up , to use men as a staffe in the hand , and bid them goe , onely to suffer them , and let them be still , and alone ? Surely the Art of Chimists is nothing to these mens , in evaporeating ; who can reduce those most just and powerfull works of God to a very nothing ; for no more is a bare suffering then a not doing . But we will briefly , as may be , handle the particulars , following their foot-steps , who beginning with Shemei , allow God onely the poore pittance of sufferance , for Davids tryall : But David himselfe will teach them better , in saying , the Lord hath sayd to him , Curse David : who shall then say , wherfore hast thou done so ? For first , if God did onely suffer , that is , not hinder Shemei , then God did not try David , but onely suffered Shemei to try him , which ●s false : Secondly , this was no● onely a tryall , but specially a punishment , or correction of his former sinnes , and therfore laid upon him by God : but whether it were tryall , or correction , or both , it was in that respect good , and of God as the Authour . Gods suffering of Shemei could not be his tryall of David . It was Shemei who was suffered ; but David who was tryed and punished , who therfore bore it with the perceings of a tender and humble heart , as Gods just work in ordering the malice of Shemei to become his rod of correction . Of Iobs afflictions , it is also presumptuously said by them , that God onely suffered them . Iob speaking of his nakednesse , and misery , saith expresly , that as the Lord had given , so the Lord had taken away . They may as well say , the Lord onely suffered the giving , as that he onely suffered the taking away of Iobs substance . He ascribeth both alike to the Lord , in regard of his providence ordering things according to their kinds . Neither is there sense to imagine , that Iob so blesseth God for onely letting the divell , and wicked men alone , to work their malice upon him , and his ; but as by the eye of faith he saw the hand of God ( to be blessed for ever ) ordering and determining the same to his own holy ends . Can any man blesse God meerly for suffering the divell to hurt him ? So God in moving David to number Israel , did not onely suffer him and Satan to do their work , but did his own also by them , though they thought not so , in ordering the malice of the one , and pride of the other , to a just occasion of punishing Israel , against whom his anger was kindled ; and this agrees well with both the proportion of faith , and generality of the Scriptures . The same in effect is to be said of the lying spirits seducing Ahabs Prophets , in which God neither puts malice into the divell , nor flattery into the hearts of false Prophets ; but finding them there before , and that of themselues , useth them by a most powerfull and skilfull hand to the furthering of the deserved destruction of a wicked King. And where they say , the controversie is , who was the first cause of this cursing , envie , pride , and deceit , they miserably deceiue themselues and others . We abhorre from saying that God is either first or last cause of any wicked thing ; but of the tryall or punishment , or other good in the ordering of the wicked thing ; as the just Iudg may use the malice or cruell disposition of the Exequutioner for the exercising of just punishment upon the malefactour . Neither doe we say ( as they dream ) that cursing , envie &c. are good in God , and wicked in the devill , and man ; This is impossible : but we say , that the ordering of them , and of the persons in whom they are , is good in God , either for tryall , or punishment . For example , of such as goe to war , and take meanes , one is moved therto , because he would not work ; another in hope of booty and prey ; a third being weary of wife or friends ; and so others , in the like corrupt respects : And yet the King , or Captain may use and order them all , and all their corrupt ends and intendments to his most just and lawfull ends , and intentions , either in offensiue , or defensiue warres . And if one frail man can make this lawfull use of the lawlesse and sinfull lusts of other men , should proud flesh quarrell at Gods most infinite power and wisedom in his just and holy works ? Or will they ( vain men ) conjure him herein within the narrow circle of their understanding ? Denying him at all to haue any hand in working , where they ( blinde molles ) cannot discern how he works ? O the depth of the riches both of the wisedom and knowledge of God ? how unsearchable are his judgements , and his waies past finding out ? cryed he , who yet could farre better discern of them , then they , or we . In opening Esa. 10. 5. 6 , they speak the truth , and that which we intend , though presently after they devoure the hallowed thing . They say well , that one wicked Nation was sent to punish another , which thing ( say they ) was good from God ; namely , to punish the wickednesse of some by others as wicked , and that this is Gods justice , though they thought not so . Very well said ; God justly punisheth the Iewes by the Assirians ; and how doth he that his just work ? By the Assirians invading and spoyling them ; and no other way : This invading , spoyling , and murdering of Israel , was the Assirians horrible sin , which therfore the Lord hated with great h●tred , and punished accordingly . Here then we haue plainly the sinnes of men ( and therfore wicked , in regard of them the doers ) avowed for the judgments of God , and in that regard just and holy : Their daring any tongue to say , that the delusion mentoned , 2 Thess. 2 , comes from God otherwise , then by suffering the divell to delude , is but the fruit of th●i● bold ignorance , with which they abuse unstable minds . As the divell and menss●lues , are the onely authours of these delusions in themselues considered ; so are there divers effectuali works of God in and about them . The first thing indeed is , Gods permission or sufferance of the Divell to exercise his malice to hurt , wherin ( as they rightly say ) he and his children takes delight ; but this is rather a not-work of God then a work ; namely , a not restraining , or hindering him . Gods next work is to order & direct Satans malice upon the persons so deluded , that so they may receiue a punishment proportionable to their sins , both for quality and quantity . A third work of God is in them , in depriving them of the knowledge and discerning of the truth , which they formerly had , without the loue therof , as the Scriptures testifie . What should I say more ? These Adversaries elsewhere , being set upon the rack , by the evidence of the place , thus speak , God will haue them to be seduced , therby to punish them : confessing therin , their seduction to be a punishment , and therin good and Gods work , and that which God wils also , as they expresly affirm . The divell wills their seduction as a hurt to them ; they will it , as a thing pleasing to them ; God wils it as a punishment of them : which last , to wit , a punishment , nothing is in it selfe , but by way of relation put upon it , by the Iudge . ADVERSARIES . AND here , to thrust God from the government of the world , they take upon them to proue , that in this , and the like cases , Gods sending is nothing but suffering : their proofe is , for that the holy Evangelists making relation of the devils possessing and drowning the swine , where one of them saith that Christ sent them , another saith , that he suffered them to enter into them ▪ Math. 8. 31. 32 , Mat. 5. 12. 13 , Luk. 8. 32. DEFENCE . BVT first I would know how they can proue , that though in one place , where no punishment is directly intended , suffering and sending be all one , therfore they are all one in all other places , where the Lord properly and professedly intends a punishment ? Secondly , I deny , that sending and suffering are here all one : but as we find in many other places , so in this , that which one Evangelist relates , though truely , yet not so fully , that another sets down more throughly with all the parts . Luke saith , He suffered them , and this is true ; Matthew saith , He sent them , and this is the same which Luke saith , and more ; namely , together with the suffering of them , the directing and determining also of their malice this way , for the Lords most holy , though unknown ends . And if the Lord in this case onely suffered them , and let them alone , then it should follow , that the creature doth some actions , wherin he is wholly left to himselfe without Gods medling with him , or ruling of him . But to come neerer the matter , I would know of these men , when two Evangelists or Prophets set down the same thing in divers words , the one in more sparing and strait , and the other in more large termes ; whether we be not to expound the strayter by the larger , and not the larger by the strayter , except there be some apparant restraint ; The Evangelist Matthew , relating the miracle done by Christ upon Peters mother saith , He touched her hand , and the fever left her : Marke saith , He took her by the hand and the fever left her . Should we now say , that to take her by the hand , and lift her up , were nothing but to touch her hand ? Or say we not truely , that Mark said the same thing which Mathew doth , and more also : so is it in Christs suffering and sending the divels . More plainly yet . We reade , how upon the death of Absolom , Ahimaz the Priest being very desirous to be the messenger therof to David , importunes Ioab greatly to let him run , and again to let him run . Ioab at the last condiscends , and saith to him run , and so v. 29 , Ahimaz expresly affirmes that Ioab sent him to David . He therfore both suffered him to goe , and sent him . He suffered him , as having a desire of himselfe ; and sent him also , as his messenger to the King. So Christ both suffered the devils , as desiring to possesse the swine rather then to be cast into the deep ; and also sent them , as ordering their malice to that object , and none other , for the tryall of the Gergesenes . In the next place , followeth to be considered of , the sending of Ioseph into Aegypt , touching which , let these two things onely be added to the things spoken , for the opening of the former instances . First , that Ioseph expresly saith , not onely that God sent him into Aegipt , but that he sent him thither to preserue life , which was Gods end , and not his brethrens , and therfore depends upon Gods work , not upon theirs : but withall , that it was not they that sent him thither , but God. Ioseph here makes God ( in a respect ) a greater doer then his brethren : these men shut God quite out , and makes him onely a sufferer , or one that left others alone , and meddles not with them . His brethren sold him , but God sent him ; that is , used their envious injury to his own gracious work , both towards him and them , and much other people , whom by his meanes he kept aliue . Secondly , and for conclusion , let this be observed , that Ioseph speaks of Gods sending him , to comfort his brethren in their sorrow and fear , for the evill they had done to him . But I would know , what comfort it could be to their perplexed hearts , to think , that God suffered them to doe wickedly , that is , hindred them not ? Can any man having grace , yea common sense , take comfort in this , that God leavs him to himselfe to doe wickedly , and hinders him not ? A miserable comforter would this miserable exposition haue made Ioseph to haue been . Whereas by the other and true sense , though their sin were nothing the lesse , yet Gods providence appeares the greater , and more gracious , in ordering their envy and malice to such an event as it had , whence no small comfort did accrew unto them . Of the death of Christ , and Gods work in giving him thereunto , even to the cursed death of the crosse , by the hands of the wicked , I haue formerly spoken at large , and will not repeat the same things . Onely , I cannot but tax their allegation of Vrsinus as most vain , who in the place not●d by them opposeth Gods permission , to his willing , and working of sinne , as sinne , and so God indeed onely permits , and neither wils , nor works sin , as sin . Otherwise , all that haue but once lookt ●nto Vrsinus know , how vehemently he impugneth that imagination of bare permission , avowing the effectuall work of Gods providence in and about sin : as both working the actions themselues , which he cals the materials of sin , and withdrawing his grace ; and withall , destinating , directing , and bringing to their ends , the same actions . That of Amos 3. 6 , is misapplyed ( if by any alledged ) and so easily answered . The last place which they take upon them to answer is Ioh. 12 , 39. 40 , Therfore they ▪ ( to wit , the Iewes , before whom Christ had done so many miracles ) could not beleev , because that Esaias had said , He hath blinded their eyes , and hardened their hearts that they should not see , &c. ADVERSARIES . THeir answer , after divers incongruous forms of speech , and some truths among , is , that this , and the like places affirm , that they winked with their eyes , lest they should see , for which cause , God gaue them up to this reprobate sense . DEFENCE . THat is , ( they being interpreters ) for winking with their eyes lest they should see , God gaue them up to wink with their eyes , lest they should see . Thus , by this untoward construction , the same thing is the cause and effect of it selfe ; their winking with their eyes , of their winking with their eyes . It is certain , that this reprobate minde in wilfull ignorance , and obduration was their proper sin ; and as certain that it was Gods just judgement upon their former sins , by his ordering therunto their corruption ; and therfore Christ spake to them in parables ( which were dark without exposition ) and expounded them when he was alone to them , which were about him : rendring thereof this reason , because it was given to them , namely to his Disciples , to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of God , but unto them that were without , all things were done in parables , that seeing they might see , and not perceiv , &c. and so Mathew saith , this was given to the one , and not given to the other : wherof also , elsewhere , he rendreth the highest reason , because so it seemeth good in Gods sight : who hath mercy on whom he will haue mercy , and whom he will , hee hardeneth . Their alledging of Austin against the heathenish desteny , which they held to come from the starres , is frivolous , and impious against Gods infinitely wise and powerfull providence , in governing all things in heaven and earth . In regard wherof , the same Father saith , that the things which are done against Gods will , are not done without his will : viz. ordering , and directing them to their ends . And if the penners of this book were not voyd , either of all knowledg of the Authours judgment , whom they cite , or modesty in themselues , they would never alledg Austin and Ursinus as patrons of their errours about the divine Predestination , and other points therupon depending : then whom the Synode at Dort hath none ( the one of former , and other of later times ) more clearly witnessing with it , and all the best Reformed Churches , in those matters . CHAP. II. Of Election . THeir first head of Predestination being ended , they come next to Election : which they consider , not as a part of the former with the Scriptures , and all good Authours ; but as clean another thing . But what , may rather bee guessed , then gathered from their words . And first , in laying down the supposed errours of their Adversaries concerning Election , they doe us and the truth , manifold injuries , as the Reader may evidently see , who pleaseth to compare with their calumnies , the Confession of the Synode thereabout , which is , Electio autem est immutabile Dei ●rop●stium &c. Election is the unchangeable purpose of God , by which , before the foundation of the world were laid , out of all mankind , faln from its primatiue integrity into sin , and destruction , by i●s own fault , according to the most free good pleasure of his will , he out of his meer grace , hath chosen to salvation in Christ , a certain multitude of such as were neither better , nor more worthy then others , but lying in the common misery with others : vvhom ( to wit Christ ) he hath appointed from eternity for Mediator and Head of the elect : and accordingly to giue them to him to be saved ▪ and to call and draw them effectually to fellowship with , him by his word and Spirit : or hath decreed to bestow upon them true faith to justifie , sanctifie , and at the length being powerfully kept in the fellowship of his Son , to glorifie them , for the declaration of his mercy ▪ and praise of the riches of his glorious grace , as it is written : He hath chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world , that we should be holy and without blame in his sight , with loue ; having predestinated us to the adoptien of children , by Iesus Christ to himselfe , according to the good pleasure of his will : to the praise of the glory of his grace , wherein he hath made us accepted in that beloved one . Eph. 1. 4. 5. 6. And elsewhere ; Whom hee hath predestinated , them also he hath called ; and whom he hath called , them also he hath justified ; and whom he hath justified , them also he hath glorified , Rom. 8. 30. And by this joynt Confession , all equall Readers will judge of the faith of the Evangelicall Churches in this point , and not by the partiall and perverse relations of such Adversaries , as catch here and there a piece divided from the rest ▪ and ometimes altering the words , alwaies perverting the meaning , therby cast stumbling stones in their own , and others way . ADVERSARIES . THese things premised , the particulars follow : the first whereof is a similitude brought , as they say by us to exemplify our opinion by , of a phisition entring into the house of sick men and curing some , and that for nothing ; who are bound to thank him ; and not cureing others who haue no cause to complain of him , because he ows them nothing . This similitude they except against as that in which comparison is made between a phisition , who hath litle mercy in him in healing but a few , and ●●aving infinite numbers unhealed and God and Christ , who are most mercifull , saying Come unto me ( all ) that are laden , and I will ease you . They therfore to correct this , will haue Christ compared to a Phisition truely mercifull , that going into the house of sick men , proclaims , that he will heal all that will take a medicine ; which some taking are cured , others refusing , because it is bitter , as to Deny a mans self , Take up his crosse and follow Christ , remain uncured . DEFENCE . FIrst , the Scripture by them cited for their catholike cure , is violently stretched aboue it reach . For , neither are all in the world , no nor a handfull ( in comparison of the rest ) laden , as Christ there speaks ; that is , feeling and groaning under the intollerable burthen of sin , and of the wrath of God due therunto . This did very few of the other Iews , and fewer of the Pharises , who thought themselues righteous : neither doth Christ so call ( and therefore not offer to cure ) by the preaching of the Gospell , every particular person in the world , from the beginning to the end therof . This truthlesse , and shamelesse assertion we shall haue occasion hereafter to confute at large . In the mean while , the place alledged proues onely thus much , that Christ , the good Phisition offers to cure all that come to him , by the preaching of the Gospell , with feeling of their sins , and faith in his death , and no more . Secondly , even for them that come to Christ , and are effectually healed by him ; these men erre ( not knowing the Scriptures , nor the power of God for the conversion of sinners ) in affirming that he doth no more but provide the medicine of grace , and outwardly perswade to the receiving of it : or that there is ( which they take wrongfully for granted ) the same natural power in a wicked man to receiv grace offered by the Gospel , that there is in a sick man to take the medicine offered him by the Phisition . This capitall errour of theirs is in this place to be refuted , and the contrary truth to be cleared ; namely , that for the effectuall converting of men , God not onely provides the medicine ( Christ and his benefits ) and by the Gospell exhorts to the rece●t thereof ; and so leavs men to their own freewill indifferently without further doing : But that w●thall , and aboue the former , hee , by the inw●id work of h●s holy Sp●●it given them , makes effectuall the outward means , in opening the heart to attend to the things spoken , with reverence ; in inlightning the understanding to discern and assent unto the same things , as true and good , and that with particular applications ; in bending the will efficaciously to consent to the same ; and all the affections of the soule to loue and like them . But before this be done by us , it is meet we answer an objection or two , rather insinuated , then expresly made by them . Their words are , which also , as appears by the mark in the margent , they would haue accounted remarkeable , that Christ is willing and able to cure men by the means by which they are curable , and not by the means by which they cannot bee cured : for that his power herein is subject to his will , and his will is , that they should take the medicine . The substance of their objection is , that God will not , and therefore cannot cure men otherwise then by their receiving the med●cine offered , Christ and his benefits . Very true , God w●ll not , nor can so doe by his revealed will , which to us is the rule of his power . But where they say ; that Gods power is subject to his will , this must be otherwise understood , then as they do ; conceiving it to be of that work of his will , by which he appoints others what they shall doe : whereas it is to be understood of that work of his will , by which he appoints in himselfe what he will doe , in or about others . As where it is said , The Lord is in heaven , and doth whatsoever pleaseth him ; ( that is , whatsoever he wils : ) the meaning is not , that he doth , or that his power is ruled by what he commands others to doe , but by his will or purpose of doing himselfe what pleaseth him . God so wils the conversion of all , to whom the Gospell comes , as to command the same , and to approue it where it is : but hee wils the conversion of some , namely the elect , with another and further intention of will , setting a work the power of his Spirit in their hearts effectually , and as they speak irresistably to convert them ; by taking away their stony heart , and giving them an heart of flesh , and by putting his Spirit within them , and causing them to walke in his statutes . Gods power then is not subject to his commanding will alwaies to work alike , where he commands alike : but it is subject to his purpose of will in himselfe , according to the good pleasure thereof to work , or not to work by means of his commanding will. The Arguments of proofe distinctly follow . 1 Arg. To receiv Christ and his grace , is to beleev in him ; this beleeving , or faith by which we are saved , is the gift of God , and not of our selues : So as not onely the medicine it selfe , and offer of it , but also the hand to receiv it with ( which is faith , and a beleeving heart ) is Gods gift . The Phisition offers and giues to the receiver the medicine , but not the heart and hand ●o receiv it : but God giues these also to them that doe receiv Christs justification and sanctification and salvation by him . If it be said , that God giues faith by preaching , and exhortation to receiv it , though he add no further work : I answer , that then God giues this gift and grace of faith , as well , and as much to them that receiv it not , but remain still unbeleevers , as to them that beleev : yea more to many unbeleevers , as having more , and more excellent outward means , then many that receiv it . It is therefore absurd to say , that God giues faith , or to beleev , unto him that never beleevs ; specially faith being such a gift , as hath no existence , but in the heart of him that beleevs . 2 Arg. The Apostle elsewhere pronounceth all men , either spirituall or naturall : Of the naturall man he testifieth ; that he doth not , nor can discern of themselvs the things of God , but that they are foolishness unto him ; but of the spirituall , that he discerns of such things and receivs them . The naturall man he neither doth nor can , the spiritual he both can and doth . What is it then that of the natural makes the spiritual man , that can doe these great things ; the bare publishing and proclaiming of this spirituall and gracious medicine in and by Christ ? Not so : for too many alas , remain naturall still , to whom the Gospell of grace is very plenteously preached . What then . Is it his freewill to receiv it , to whom it is preached ? Not so , neither : for his will is but the will of a naturall man , who neither doth , nor can discern and receiv the things of God , till he become spirituall . It is then Gods holy Spirit , which he giues to one that hears the Gospell , and not to another ; which makes one hearer spirituall , and not another : thereby changing both the will , and whole man of him to whom he giues it . 3 Arg. A third is taken from 1. Cor. 3. 6. 7. Paul plants , Apollo waters , but God giues the increase . And , Neither he that plan●eth is any thing , nor he that watereth , but God that giveth the increase . The Corinthians did too highly advance the Ministers by them factiously adhered unto , as is evident ; setting them in Christs , and Gods place : the Apostle thereupon puls them down , and sets them in their owne place , shewing that except God ▪ and a further work then their preaching , how sound and excellent soever , all ●s nothing . But by these mens device , there needs no further work of grace from God , then the gracious proclamation made by preaching , to be received by mans free-will : and so Gods further work of giving the increase , is quite shut out . 4. Arg. When the Iewes , Ioh. 6. murmured at Christs words , he to stop their mouths , and to prevent his Disciples offence-taking , sayth , that No man commeth unto him , except the father , which sent him , draw him . If any say , that God drawes men to Christ by the preaching of the Gospell , it is true , but not to the purpose of the place : for so the Iewes were drawn that came not , as well as they that came and beleeved . There is then requisite that men may come to Christ , or beleeue on him , a further drawing , then that by the outward preaching onely . Not that God drawes men , as horses draw a cart , or by any violence , or compulsion against , or without their will ; but that he makes them by the inward work of his Spirit ( joyned with the outward word ) of unwilling , willing , effectually driveing away ignorance and rebellion ; and so enlightening the minde , as to as●●ns , and the will , to consent . 5 Arg. Lastly , these adversaries suffering their mercifull Phisition to go no further then the proclaiming & offering of the medicine of grace to the sick of sin , do therein make many despisers of all grace and goodnes , ( so living and dying ▪ and perishing for ever ) more bound and beholden to God , and his grace , then many other the most faithfull , holy , and happy servants of Christ. The reason is plain ; for that many liveing and dying impenitent , haue had the Gospell in a far more full and plenteous manner and measure published and preached unto them , with all other outward motives and provocations of grace ; then many that truely beleev and repent . These adversaries to the grace of God , would make the faithfull servants of God more Pharisaicall then the Pharisees themselues ; with whom they consort in divers poynts of their faith . The Pharisee that went up with the Publican into the Temple to pray , yet thanked God that he was not like other men as extortioners , unjust , &c. nor as the Publican : But by these mens doctrine , we should thank our selues , ●f we be not like the wicked and gracelesse men , and not God : for God , by their saying , hath not done so much for many of us , as for many of them , who haue enioyed more excellent outward means of grace offered , then many of the others . Oh you the followers of these guides ; yea , you the guides your selvs , call to remembrance the dayes of your ignorance , and prophanenes , ( specially divers of you ) before your first conversion to the Lord● and consider whether you were not deeper rooted in sin , then many others , who yet haue not received the grace which you haue done , to beleev , and repent ; and giue the glory to Gods grace , and not to your own free-will , that you beleev , repent , and obey , rather then they . Be not unmindfull of this unspeakable mercie of God towards you aboue others , equal and aboue you in the enioying of outward means , least it come to ●o appeare in time , that you were never indeed partakers thereof . ADVERSARIES . NExt , they come to shew what Election is , laying down for that end , at large , the Parable of the mariage of the Kings son , Math. 22. and infisting specially upon the Lords conclusion , vers . 14. Many are called , but few are chosen : inferring thereupon , that it was the Kings will and pleasure , that all ( the bidden guests ) should come and bring their wedding garment . DEFENCE . THE Scripture we acknowledge , and their inference : but both affirm and haue proved , that , besides and aboue this will of God in bidding , and inviteing the guests ( common ●o those that came not , and that came ; and to those that came with , and without the wedding garment ) there was a further work of Gods pleasure , and will towards the Elect vessels of mercie , setting awork his powerfull spirit in their hearts , to make them willing to come , and that furnished , as they ought . And so oft as these men ( as they doe it very often ) doe urge the will of God , that men should beleeve , repent , and be saved , so oft the Reader must call to mind this distinction . First , that this will of God extends but to such persons , as to whom the Gospell ( the onely means of inviting men ) is preached . Secondly , that towards those that do effectually beleeve and repent , there is also a further degree of Gods good will and pleasure , according to which he reveales unto them effectually heavenly things ; opens their hearts to attend to the things spoken , and gives them to beleev and repent upon their hearing ; as the peculiar fruit of their eternall election . Their spiritual sense also of the parable I acknowledge . But whereas Ereunetes sees , that Election consists in the wedding garment , and righteousnesse of Christ , which is Christ himself , whom the faithfull do put on by faith and obedience : He sees that which is not to bee seen , and sees not that which is plain enough . Who having common sense , will say , that Christ and his righteousnesse ; and the chusing of a man , or his election , are all one ? Christ is not our election , but he in whom we are chosen , or elected . Neither is our putting on of Christ by faith and obedience , our election ; as they unskilfully make it . Election is Gods work , not ours ; for it is God that clruseth us , and not we our selues : but the putting on of Christ by faith and obedience , is our work by Gods grace , and not Gods. God doth not beleeve and obey , but we by his grace . Now before we come to refute their opinion about Election , hereafter layd down more plainly , but here more confusedly , with certain scriptures , rather heaped together then orderly brought for their purpose ; it is expedient we examine a distinction brought by them of this divine Election , by occasion of an objection from Ephes. 1. 4. which is , that election is either in the decree or purpose of God onely ; or else effectually and particularly made , as they speak . This distinct on in a good sense ( but not in theirs ) is good and true . For God elects men before the world , or before they be , in his decree and purpose onely . But it must withall be considered , that this election is also ( in Gods purpose ) actuall and particular before the world . Nothing in God is potentiall , b●t all actuall . Otherwise there should be imperfection in God , as all potentials are , being to be perfected by their actualities . They should therefore say , that Gods election of some particulars , was onely in his decree before the world , and is by him in time brought into actuall execution . And here also it must be minded , that whereas all the question ( in effect ) amongst all , is about election as before the world , and in Gods eternall decree : they ( in effect ) passe that wholly by , and onely treat of it , as God in time puts that in decree in actuall execution . Now though their reasoning of election here be full of confusion and contradiction , as any judicious Reader may see , ●●d such as out of which their meaning can hardly be picke●● yet this is plain , that they will haue it to depend upon the condition of faith and repentance going before , affirming expresly , that those persons in whom God findeth faith and obedience , them he electeth to salvation in his son , of meer mercie , for the quality which he findeth in them . But now wherein this election properly stands , they neither shew us , nor understand themselues , as is plain by their crosse and unconstant assertions of and about it ; wherein yet they are so peremptory and bold , as if they carried all by plain demonstration of undoubted truth . What course then are we to hold with them ? Considering it is with them as Salomon speaks of the harlot , who was lowd and stubborn , whose feet aboad not in the house , but she was now without , now in the streets , and laying wayt in every corner . I haue no other way but to pursue them into , and hunt them out of every corner , where they lye in wayt to deceive . First then for Math. 22. Many are called , but few chosen , It must be noted , that there are three degrees of mens calling to Christ. The first , when the Gospel is preached , but the so called refuse wholly to answer & come : so were the first guests called . The second is , when men are perswaded to come after a maner , and in some shew , but without truth of faith and repentance ; and so he came who wanted the wedding garment . The third is , when men come in true faith and obedience , as they ought ; and so the rest of the guests came . Of this third and last degree of calling the Apostle speakes , saying , Whom he predestinated them also he called ; whom he called , them also he justified ; and whom he justified them also he glorified . This cannot be sayd of either of the two former sorts of called , but of the latter onely . And for the Election here spoken of , it may well be understood of the eternall election in Gods decree ; the fruits and wholsome effects whereof this unprepared guest shews himself not to be made partaker of , though he participated of the outward calling , even to the making of some shew of that which in truth he wanted . And as the Apostle affirms of the Ephesians , that they were elect of God in Christ before the foundation of the world , in regard of the faith and holines appearing in them : so might the Lord well say of this , and other ( his like ) hypocrites , and unsanctified ones ; that they are not of the number of the elect , or chosen in Gods eternall decree , so far as their present state manifests . Neither is it the meaning of the Lord in those words simply to reprove him for not having on a wedding garment ; but for coming thither and not having it on . Friend , how comest thou hither , not having on a wedding garment ? and so to warn others to make sure their election , and not to content themselues with the shew of obedience , without inward truth . And taking the words thus , they make for our , and against their opinion . Or take the words as meant of the actual execution of election , and that in the largest sense , so as in the same be cōprehended whatsoever God doth in time , for the effectual procuring of a mans salvation ; as of the giving of Christ for him , of the Gospell to him , and by it faith and holinesse , and the spirit of adoption ; and so glory in the end : and we say , all this he doth according to his eternall purpose of election , effectuall onely in those who are made partakers of the inward calling , and wedding garment thereby , and not in all that are called outwardly . For known unto the Lord are all his workes from the beginning of the world . Whatsoever God doth in time , that he purposed to do from eternitie , as he doth it . But take election as these men do in most places , and which seems likewise to be their meaning upon best advise ; for that first work of mercie in God by which he actually and particularly , as they speak , chuseth persons to salvation ; they erre with great error in holding that this election is for the qualitie which God findes in persons , and upon the condition of faith and repentance going before , and that God onely chuseth and electeth where he finds faith and obedience to his son . For first , the Apostle teacheth , Eph. 1. 4. that we are chosen in Christ ( to wit , as the mediator and meanes of communicating all spirituall blessings with us ) before the foundation of the world was layd , that we might be holy and unblameable in loue before him . This is meant ( our adversaries granting it ) of the decree of election : the meaning therefore must needs be , that God hath from eternity decreed to elect or chuse us in time actually , not because we should or would be holy , as these men perversly imagine , but that we might be holy . As God from eternity purposed to chuse men , so hee chuseth them actually in time : But he purposed from eternity to chuse men that they might be holy , and therfore actually in time chuseth them , that they might be holy , and unblameable before him ; and therfore not because they are holy , or beleev and obey . Gods actuall chusing therfore goes before our actuall faith , holinesse , repentance , and obedience , as the cause ; and follows them not , as an effect , as they mis-judge . The same is confirmed from v. 5 , where we are said to be predestinated to the adoption of children by Iesus Christ : With which joyne that , Rom. 8. 30 , Whom he predestinated , them also he called , and whom he called , them also he justified , and whom he justified , them also he glorified . To be elected , to wit , in decree , and to be predestinated ( in the good part , as here ) are the same in substance : onely , we are said to be predestinated in respect of the supernaturall ends , ( and means leading therunto ) unto which God in time bringeth us ; and to be elect , or chosen in respect of others , from whom God selecteth us . Now , if we be predestinated of Christ to the adoption of children , then not because we are children or beleev , which are the same , Ioh. 1. 12. To this purpose it is , that the Lord so oft by Moses beats upon this , that he chose the Israelits to be his people , out of his loue to them , and loue and promise to their Fathers : excluding all other motiues , and placing the cause of his chusing them in himselfe alone , and his loue , and the stability of his purpose and promise . Moses testifyeth , that God chose them that they might be a holy and peculiar people unto the Lord : But these men will make God begin at the other end , and chuse men because they are an holy and peculiar people , that is , having faith , and repentance going before . Ioyn we with this , that in the Psalm : Blessed be the man whom thou chusest , and causest to approach unto thee , that he may dwell in thy courts ; we shal be satisfied with the goodnesse of thy house , of thy holy Temple Faith then and holinesse are not the fore found conditions for which God chuseth a man : but the actuall conferring and giving of them , according to an eternall purpose , is the very actuall chusing of him : even that by which God severs , elects , selects , and chuseth him out of the masse of the wicked . Every mans common sense will teach this . All are of themselues , and by nature , sinners , and subject to wrath . Now what is it for God actually to chuse some from the rest , but to bestow that upon them actually and effectually , by which they differ actually from the rest , which is faith and repentance . God doth not therfore ( as these adversaries imagine ) chuse , upon condition of faith and repentance going before : but doth , by the very bestowing of these graces of faith and repentance , which others want , chuse , elect , select and sever actually from others , the elected from eternity in his decree . Lastly , by the crosse doctrine of these men , we should chuse God , before God chuse us ; for by beleeving and obeying , we chuse God to be our God ; and for this ( by their crooked rule ) God after chuseth us to be his people . Thus proud flesh will needs be before hand with God. But Christ our Lord leads us another way , saying ; You haue not chosen me , but I haue chosen you , to wit , first : which he speaks , not onely of their Apostolicall , but of their Christian state also , as the words following make it plain , that whatsoever ye shall aske of the Father in my Name , hee may giue it you ; Vnto the state of faith and obedience onely doth this promise appertain . Their assertion thus disproved , wee will come to their proofs , which are partly impertinent , and partly against themselues . The first is , The Lord chuseth to himselfe a righteous man. The place , which is Psal. 4. 3 , they note not , for what purpose they best know : but all may know it is grosly perverted , a● not being meant of Davids election to salvation , but to the Kingdom of Israel ; whose glory that way his adversaries would haue turned unto shame , but all in vain , v. 3. But consider we this choise in proportion to the other , and see what followeth . Gods actuall chusing of David to the Kingdom of Israel , was that by which he had first actuall right to that Kingdom , to which he had right before , onely in Gods decree , and of which afterwards he had possession . So Gods actuall chusing of a man to the Kingdom of heaven , is that by which he hath first actuall right to that Kingdom , to which he had no right before , saue in Gods decree . Gods chusing a man therfore actually ( as they speak ) to the Kingdom of heaven , is the very giving of him faith and holinesse ; for by these he hath this actuall right to eternall life and glory . If therfore Gods chusing men actually ( opposed to his chusing them in decree ) be his giving them actuall faith and repentance , then their faith and repentance goes not before Gods choise , but on the contrary , his chusing before their beleeving . The giving of the grace by God , must needs goe before the having of it by men . With like successe , they quote , Rom. 9. 25 , and ● Pet. 2. 10 ▪ &c. which haue no shew of ground , whereon to build their assertion , that God chuseth men actually and particularly because they beleev and repent : but most firm foundation for the contrary truth ; Men become Gods people , and beloved actually , by actuall faith and repentance : which before were his , and beloved onely , in the purpose of his will , according to election , Rom. 9. 11. 13 , and elect , according to Gods foreknowledge , 1 Pet. 1. 2 , God therefore actually chusing men , and making them his people , and beloved ( which are all one ) by giving them to beleev and repent : their beleeving and repenting cannot goe before his chusing them , but the contrary . The giving of the gift , is in nature before the having and using of it by him to whom it is given ; and therefore ●ods chusing them , which is his giving them faith and repentance , is before their beleeving , and repenting . The next place , being Rom. 11. 5. 7 , they set down craftily thus : v. 5 , If they seek righteousnesse by faith , and these are th● the elect according to the election of grace . The words of the Apostle are ; So then at this time also , there is a remnant , according to the election of grace : and v. 7 , the election hath obtained it , and the rest were hardened . The thing obtained was , the righteousnesse of God , and of faith ; the wedding garment , the righteousnesse which Israel obtained not , because they went about to stablish their own righteousnesse : but the election obtained it by beleeving ; even that remnant wherof Paul was one , according to the election of grace . What can be more plain against these men ? Or how can any more directly crosse the Apostle , then they doe ? The Apostle saith , we obtain the righteousnesse of faith , which is the wedding garment , according to the election of grace : They say , we obtain the election of grace according to the wedding garment , and righteousnesse of faith and obedience . The Apostle saith , the election obtains the righteousnesse of Christ by faith : they say , the righteousnes of Christ by faith , obtains the election : turning Gods work upside down , that they may establish their own . Besides this proud exaltation , and Babylonish building of mens works against Gods grace ( for if it be of obedience , as they say , then of works , to wit , the works of obedience ) the Apostle v. 6 , clean overturns , saying . If by grace , then it is no more of works , otherwise grace is no more grace : but if it be of works , then it is no more grace , otherwise works is no more works . In alledging from 2 Pet. 1. 10 , that this election must be made sure , they , as before , craftily conceal part of the Apostles words , which being laid down , as the Text hath them , overthrow plainly their errour . The words are , Giue diligence to make your calling and election sure . He joyns calling and election together : they leav calling out . And herein I commend them , as the master did the unrighteous steward , for doing wisely ▪ though not honestly . For who knows not , that Gods calling us , goes before our answering him by faith , and obedience , as the cause therof ? God cals ( and also elects ) men to faith , and obedience , and not for them . The Apostles meaning is , that the faithfull should use all godly care for the establishing and confirming of themselvs in the grace of God , to which they were formerly called and chosen . The like prophane boldnesse , they use towards , 1 Thess. 1. 4 , where for the Apostles text , Knowing beloved your election of God ; or , Knowing , beloved of God , your election , they put their own glosse , The houshold of faith , the Church of God , are the elect of God. The Apostle , v. 4 , mentions his knowledg of their election , and v. 5. 6 , the ground of that his knowledg ▪ and perswasion , which was their faith and obedience by receiving the Word by him preached . They were not therefore made elect of God , by faith and obedience , but therby known for such by men . Col. 3. 12 , makes against them also ; where their election is mentioned as a reason to moue them to put on bowels of mercy , and all goodnes . As indeed the gracious purpose of Gods election , with his effectuall calling followeth , and manifest●th , is the onely Evangelicall motiue to all earnest study of obedience . Their assertion following , that Election is not of particular persons , but of qualities , is monstrous , and most crosse to the Scriptures , which never mention election of qualities , but alwaies of persons . Is the meaning of Christ , Math. 22. Many are called , but few chosen , that many qualities are called , and few chosen ? What quality but of sin , and misery , sees the Lord in them whom he calleth ? Or how can qualities be either called , or chosen to grace or glory ? Christ tels his Disciples , that he had chosen them out of the world . If they were chosen out of the world , which lyeth in wickednesse , and hates the good ; for what good qualities , trow we , were they chosen ? If they were chosen out of the world , and so were of the world before they were chosen out of it ; how had they faith and obedience , for which these men wil appoint God to chuse them , or else not ? That we are Gods generation , viz. by creation , is true , but impertinent . Of ●ods working good qualities in men by his word , and spirit , and of their resisting , or not resisting , we haue spoken , and shall speak else where . Rom. 8 , 29 , makes for them as the former places ; shewing plainly ● , that our predestination or election goes before our calling , our calling before our justification , our justification before our glorification . The note in the English Testament upon Ephes. 1 , is the same which the Synode at Dort , and all Evangelical Churches professe . Onely these mens errour is , in their not putting a difference between Gods decree to saue , and his actual saving of them that beleev , whether by justifying or glorifying them . Gods chusing a man , ( whether in decree from eternity , or by actuall and effectuall calling , and calling of him out of the state of sin , by giving him the spirit of faith and grace ) goes before his beleeving ; for hee cannot beleev before hee haue faith , nor haue it before God giue him it : but his actuall saving by justification and glorification , follows after faith . The discourse which here they fall into touching Gods deliberating , and decreeing to make man , &c , is impertinent , considering that our question is onely of that decree which is Evangelicall , and of mercy , and so presupposeth man faln , and in misery by reason therof : So is the deliberation which they imagine in God , incompetent to his infinite wisedom and providence . They make God like a weak man , contriving his purposes with ifs & ands ; as though he stood in a mammering , and unresolved , what to doe , till hee found by experience , what men would doe first . And here I demand of these men , what if some of those so actually , really , and particularly chosen to salvation ( as they speak ) upon their faith and obedience , and to whom God hath so fully purposed , without ifs or ands , to impart the Kingdom of heaven , doe afterwards wholly fall away ( as they hold any may , and many doe ) then all this actuall , reall , and particular chusing , and setled purpose of God , is voyd and frustrate ; and God must unpurpose what he had formerly purposed really , actually and particularly ; and undecre● what he had formerly decreed . They should therfore haue learnt in this place , from their more learned Masters , to haue added the condition of their persevering to the end , without which it is certain , none shall be saved . But then they must needs rush upon the same deperate rock , with the other ; which is , that none are thus actually and particularly elect or chosen , till they be dead , seeing they deny all certainty of perseverance , to the living ; not acknowledging any thus elect , either before the world , or in it , but after the world , and in heaven . The Scriptures here produced to proue that men are not actually , really , and particularly Gods people , and partakers of the grace of Christ before the world , and they also be , and before they haue learned Christ , might well haue been spared , as proving that onely which no man doubts of . Onely they must learn , that it is one thing for a people to become actually Gods people , and partakers of his grace , and another thing for God actually to purpose in himselfe from eternity , in time to make them such . Nothing in God is potent all , but all actuall . Their proofs of an universall calling in the means of salvation , we will presently examine ; not●ng onely by the way , their apparant contradiction of themselues , and unjust insinuation against us . They contradict themselues in saying , that God chuseth all men , good and bad upon condition of faith and obedience , the partition wall being broken down . To chuse , is to take some from the rest , and not to take all . He that takes all alike , chuseth none . Besides , by this , the same persons are both elected and reprobated , chosen , and refused : and every one alike either of both . Then which nothing is more absurd . The insinuation is , that we make God an accepter of persons , in saying , that he chuseth men that haue not put on Christ. Nothing lesse . To accept persons in the Scriptures , is to judge of , or doe to a person , better or worse , for some by thing in or about him : whereas God in chusing one before another , whether in the decree , or actuall application , of grace respecteth nothing in the chosen , but onely the good pleasure of his own will , in himselfe . This is the highest cause that God would haue us take knowledge of ; though wee also know in the generall , that God is no way wilfull in his will , though hee be most free , but alwaies most wise and holy . To remoue a little further out of the way this stone , at which divers stumble . First , we know , that all by nature , and of themselvs , are subject to sin , and condemnation , and so might in justice haue been left of God , without remedy of redemption . If then it had been but just with God to haue left all in that state of sin and misery , into which they haue cast themselvs , it is then meere mercy , that he hath chosen any in his Son , or given him for any . Now if of all men , indefinitely considered as faln . God haue purposed in himself from eternity , to raise up some , by working effectually in them faith and obedience , so to saue them ; and not to work the same in others , but to leav them to their own affected and effected pravity , and sin , and so in justice to condemn them for that their wickedness by them freely committed , and obstinately continued in ; I would know , in regard of whether of these two works we can be said to make God , a respecter of persons ? The one being a pure work of his mercy , and the other of his justice . Why God should thus chuse some , and passe by others , in the generall , we see reason , both by the light of nature , and the Scriptures ; namely , that the glory of his power , and justice might be seen in the one , and of the riches of his mercy in the other . But why in particular , the Lord God should rather chuse this man , or woman , then that , we leav unto himselfe to know , till the day of revelation of hidden things . Onely , let our care and diligence be in the mean while , first , to know assuredly , that we are our selvs of that blessed number , and by such marks , as cannot deceiv ; and so knowing , both to haue in our hearts , and to expresse in word and deed all thankfulnes unto our good God , and most gracious Father , who hath vouchsafed unto us , aboue many others , such singular mercy . ADVERSARIES . IT now remains , we come to examine , whether ( to use their own words ) the wicked that come to damnation , had by this purpose of God ( spoken of before ) means of salvation , if they had not refused it . DEFENCE . FIrst , if this of outward means were granted them , it would not help them to proue the purpose of God to saue all ; except they could also proue , that there needed nothing on Gods part , but the outward means . This , as they cannot doe , so haue I formerly proved plainely the contrary : and that though God so provide , that even Paul plant , and Apollos water , in the most full , and free offer of the outward means that can be ; yet except the same God , by the inward and effectuall work of his Spirit , giue the increase also , all is nothing . Secondly , I deny , that the wicked who perish , all , and every one of them , haue had , or haue the outward meanes of salvation offered them . ADVERSARIES . BVT here , before they come to that which they promise , they offer , and enterprise the proving of another thing , which is , that Christ dyed unfeynedly for all without exception ; by whose death all might be saved , if they did not reject it . DEFENCE . FIrst , I here acknowledge , that the death of Christ ( being God ) is in it selfe sufficient for all , and every person in the world ; and so might haue been an effectuall price for all , if it had pleased the Father , and him so to haue ordained . But that it was the Fathers purpose in giving his Son , or his in giving himself to the death , to pay the price of the sins of the whole world , and of every particular person therin , and to satisfy Gods justice for the same , we deny , and they in vaine go about to prov . That Christ dyed for sinners , and the ungodly , and such as were dead , Rom. 5. 6. 8 , we grant , as being the Apostles assertion ; but that he dyed for all such , is their bold addition ; and ( which is worse ) plainly against the drift of the place . The Apostle having before treated at large of justification by faith , shews in this chapter the singular benefit acrewing therby to the faithfull , as peace with God , accesse into grace , rejoycing in hope of the glory of God , and that also in tribulation : that their tribulation working patience , their patience experience of Gods power , and grace in sustaining them ; that experience , hope that they should never be confounded , as having such assurance of the loue of God in their hearts by the Holy Ghost given of God unto them . The ground of all which hee layeth , v. 6. 8 , for that Christ dyed for them being ungodly and sinners : and thereby appropriates this dying of Christ unto these sinners , who are in their time thus justified by faith , haue peace with God , &c. which limitation the Apostle most plainely makes , where he sai●h ; For when we were yet without strength , God commendeth his loue towards us , in that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us . He speaks of them , and them alone in this plaee , as dyed for by Christ , who were justified by him . And let me here turn into the very bowels of these mens errour , the sword of the spirit , which the Apostle , in this place , puts into mine hand ; and proue briefly , but evidently , that Christ dyed not for all and every person , as is said ; but onely for them , and for all them who in the end are saved , and obtain eternall life by him . These men ( and rightly ) in this very place , make it all one , for Christ to die for sinners , and to be their reconciliation : as the Apostle makes them all one who are justified by faith , and for whom Christ dyed . Shall we then make doubt to conclude with the Apostle , that they which are justified by Christ bloud ( which are the sinners for whom hee dyed , v. 9 , ) shall be saved from wrath through him , v. 9 , or that they which are reconciled to God by the death of his Son ( that is , say they , for whom he dyed ) shall much more be saved by his life ? For which purpose also hee after enters into comparison of the first , and second Adam , shewing , that as by the offence of one all were dead : so by the righteousnesse of one , the gift of grace should abound to many , or to all : by which gift afterwards he shews himselfe to mean both justification , and reigning in life . He puts the two Adams as two common roots , the former as a naturall root , and the latter as a spirituall ; and affirms , that all that were , and are , in the former , and naturally growing of him dyed by his sin : and proportionably , that all in the latter , liue by his righteousnes . I say , that were in the first Adam ; for Eve , though she were of mankind , yet dyed not by Adams sin , because she was not in him , when he sinned ; neither yet Christ , as man , not coming of him by naturall generation , but by miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost . So on the contrary , they ( and onely they ) who by faith are planted in Christ , and justified by his bloud , shall be saved from wrath through him , and receiving of the gift of righteousness , shall raign in life by him . The Apostles meaning therefore is not , that Christ died for all particulars , but that all for whom he dyed , shall be saved by him : which seeing all are not ; it followeth that he dyed not for all , as they mean. For the right interpretation of 2. Cor. 5. 14. 15. For the loue of Christ constraineth us , because we thus judge , that if one dyed for all , then were all dead ; and that he dyed for all , that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselues , but unto him which dyed for them , and r●se again : and of many the like places , the common and true rule must haue place ; that note of universalitie , as all whatsoever , and the like , must be restrained to the matter in hand : as , Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name , that I will doe : that is , whatsoever according to my will. So , whatsoever they ( the Pharisees ) bid you doe , that doe : to wit , accord●ng to Moses . So , they that beleeved , had all things common that is , all things lawfull , and for nec●ssitie . Likewise , Luk. 4. 1. All the world should be taxed , that is , a●l under Caesar : which a great part of the world was not . So All things are lawful for me , and I become all to all : that is , not all absolutely , but all things in themselves indifferent , and of that kinde , of which the Apostle speakes . I then answer , that by all in this place , he means all of that sort , of whom he speakes : all , whom the loue of Christ constrained : all , that so judge of Christs death : all , that were dead ; that is , were dead , but are aliue by grace , and so should not henceforth live to themselues , but unto him which died for them : Christ that one Mediator , died for all them . To 1. Tim. 2. 6. Christ gave himselfe a ransom for all . We answer , that by all is not meant all particulars in the world , but all sorts of people , as well Kings ( which many Christians , considering their cruell hatred of Christ , and other enormities , thought rather to be prayed against , then for ) as others . The Apostle here informes them better , and that Christ dyed for all , and would haue all , that is , men of all sorts saved , even Kings as well as others . It is not possible for any Christian to pray for every particular person in the world : nor lawfull to pray that God would saue all in generall : seeing we know by the Scriptures , that all shall not be saved , and are also forbidden to pray for some in particular . The Apostle 1 Tim. 4. 10. speaks not of Christs dying for all men , but of Gods saving of all men , specially them that beleev , If he speak of salvation by Christs death , God should save unbeleevers so living and dying : for he sayth not that God would be , but that God is the saviour of all men . He speaks apparantly of Gods providence over all , preserving good and bad ; yea saving man and beast ; specially them who suffer reproch , because they trust in the living God. To conclude , Those for whom Christ died , he died alike for : and therefore not specially for any , aboue others , but alike for all , for whom he dyed . To 1. Ioh. 2. 2. I answer , that he speakes not onely of Christ , as dying for us , but also as he is our Advocate in heaven with the Father , propitiating , or pacifying his anger towards us in procuring actually the forgivenesse of our sinnes , and acceptance with him . By the whole world therefore he understands such as confess their sins , such as whose sins God forgivs , cleansing them from all unrighteousness , such as have Christ their Advocate with the father , for whose sins he is a propitiation , &c. which are onely the faithfull , and that not onely of the Iewes intended in these words , and not for ours onely , but of the Gentiles also , as the whole world , here and els where by Christ and the Apostles opposed to the Iewes . Mark. 16. 15. Iohn 3. 16. specially Rom. 11. 12. where ( as here ) by the world , is meant the beleeving Gentiles obtaining salvation , opposed to the Iewes . And this our limitation in just proportion , the very next place cited by our adversari●s , confirmeth : The whole world lyeth in wickednesse , 1. Ioh. 5. 19. that is , all such Iewes and Gentiles as are not born of God , v. 20. not Iohn , or other beleevers , one or other . The Apostle Peter , 2. Epist. 3. 9. speaks not at all of Christs death , but of Gods patience , that none might perish , but all repent . By which all he means all the elect which were in their time to repent , and so to be saved : for whose sakes , and not in slackness , as the mockers accounted , he deferred his judgments . Reve. 6. 11. we haue this poynt notably exemplified . And it was sayd unto them ▪ that they should rest yet for a little season , untill their fellow servants also , and their brethren that should be killed , as they were should be fu●filled . For which purpose it must be minded , that Peter sayth , The Lord is long suffering towards us , not willing that any should perish , opposing us as the elect , to the reprobate Scoffers at God , both in his word and works . The last place being 2. Chron. 36. 16. is impertinent , as neither meant of Christs death ( of which the question is ) nor of mans salvation by it ; but of a bodily and visible judgement : in which kind of works God tieth himself to no certain form of proceeding . Against their error of universall redemption by Christs death , I thus argue : Them whom God and Christ love ( to wit , with that speciall loue of mercy ) they love unto the end ; and therefore never come to hate them as they do the wicked and damned . But , for whomsoever Christ dyed , God in giving his Sonne , and he in giving himselfe to the death for them , love with the most speciall love of mercy that can be : Therefore they for whom Christ died , never perish , but in time haue wrought in them faith and repentance , and are kept in the same , by the power of God to life . Christ therefore dyed effectually , and in his , and his fathers intention of love , for them onely that are saved , and perish not . This is also more manifest Ioh. 17. whence may be drawn many arguments to prove that all for whom Christ died , are saved , seeing all that are given to Christ of the Father , keep the word of God , and haue eternall life given them by him , Now it cannot be denyed , but that all for whom Christ dyed , are given him of the Father , that he might redeem and save them by his death . Furthermore , the death and bloodshed of Christ is every where called the price of our redemption , and a ransome for sinners . Vpon this holy foundation most clearly layd in the Scriptures , these men , and others would build a more hatefull Babell then that of old in the East : by which they would , as it were , scale heaven , and depriue God of divers his most glorious Attributes ; by name , his Wisdom , his Power , and his Iustice. His wisdom they ●mpeach in affirming , that he would buy with so rich & precious a price as the bloud and death of his onely begotten Son , that , and them whom he certainly knew before , he should never possesse by it , for that end , for which he bought them , their justification , sanctification , and salvation . Secondly it impeacheth Gods power , and makes him unable , doe he what he can , to save any more then he doth save , though he desire it never so much . For look , for whom he would do the greatest thing that possibly he could , which was the giving of his onely begotten and beloved Sonne to the cursed death of the crosse , for them and their salvation ( without all doubt ) hee he will doe whatseever other good ( as lesse ) that possibly he can . Whereupon it should follow that God cannot possibly give the Gospell to more then he doth , and by it convert and confirm them to and in his grace , which are lesse things then the former ; it being the foundation , they , but the building upon it : it being the meritorious , and deserving cause● and they effects thereof . Thirdly , this conceit makes God unjust , in taking a full price and ransom for mens sins , at the hands of their surety Christ ( as was his death and obedience ) and yet not resting satisfied with it , but exacting the debt of their sinnes at their hands , by eternall punishment ; which is the condition of many thousands in the world . ADVERSARIES . OTher things follow , tending to prove Gods purpose to save all , even such as slew Christ , blasphemed and resisted the spirit of God , to their condemnation , &c. Act. 3. 25. 26. & 5. 30. 31. & 7. 51. & 13. 46. & 15. 6. DEFENCE . I Answer , that the persons of whom those Scriptures speak , were the peculiar people of God , and not yet wholly cast off by him . The argument therefore from Gods will and work for the saving of them , is stretched beyond its reach , to prove such purpose , will or work of God to save all which are not his people , as they were . Secondly , I grant , that where the Gospell is preached , there the Lord truely wills , that is , commands the conversion of sinners , and their turning from iniquity , as the text hath ●t ; approving and rewarding the same with salvation , in them , in whom it is found , as it is ordinarily in some of them to whom the Gospell is preached ; and so was in some of the persons to whom the men of God spake in those places ; who before were elect of God , and redeemed of Christ , and were in their time effectually called to that grace , whatsoever before they had done , or been . Now the Apostles not knowing which in particular were elect , and redeemed in the secret purpose of God , and Christ , were to sow the seed of grace upon all grounds , and to preach to all indifferently , as they had occasion ; hoping in charity that this , and that , and any one particular , might be of the elect vessels , and good ground in Gods destination : by whose preaching such as were preordained to life , beleeved actually . The Lord tels Paul , abiding in Corinth , that he had much people in that Citie , and that therefore he should speak the word there , and not hold his peace . He sayth not , as they would have him , that all in that Citie were his people in that sense , but much , or many . Now Paul not knowing which were they , which not , preacheth indifferently to all ; and the Lord by giving an increase to his preaching , shews in time which of them were bought with the price of Christs blood : they becomming members of Christ ▪ and joyned to the Losd ; which he notes as singular privileges of the elect from eternity , aboue others . And in this I haue been something the longer , because being well noted and applyed , it may serve for answer to all the Scriptures brought by them for the establishing of their universall grace ftom the preaching of the Gospell , though it were as universall as they erroneously make it . More particularly , to their first proof from the similitude of marriage , Math. 22. I answer , that it makes nothing for them either in drift , or words . The drift of the parable is not to shew that all and each person in the world are called , but that few of them that are called , doe rightly obey . Neither sayth Christ , that all are called , but many . I add , that this place by rebound utterly overthrowes them : as shewing plainly , that the Gentiles ( as the latter guests ) were not called , till the Iews ( the first guests ) refused to come . Many thousands therefore of them in former ages , lived and died being uncalled by the Gospell . The places , Math. 28. and Mark. 16. speak also of the time after Christs ascension , and not before , and so overthrow an universall calling of all , at all times : God shewed his word to Iakob ; but dealt not so with any other nation . Besides , their meaning is not , that the Apostles should preach to every particular person in the world : for that neither could they possibly doe , ne●ther can they be imagined , without madnesse , to have done it , but to shew , that as God had formerly by the Prophets taught that one nation of the Iewes ; so now hee would have all other nations taught , as there was opportunity and occasion . By that Rom. 10. 18. the Apostle means not , that the Gospell was preached in all ages to every person in the world . He quotes Psal. 19. which speakes apparently of the creatures preaching , specially the heavens and firmament , which the Holy Ghost here applieth to the Apostles preaching in their age , either by way of argument , or allusion . And yet even this very Apostle in this Epistle , shews that then there were places , where Christ was not named , nor spoken of , and wheremen had not heard of him . To the other places brought , the former answers suffice . Where it is sayd , the Gospel is now preached to all nations , and through the whole world , ▪ and to every creature , and the like , first , the note of distinction now , is to be minded , intimating , that before now the Gospel was not preached to nations , but to that one nation of the Iewes onely . Secondly we are not to imagine , that by all nations , and the like , is meant every particular nation without exception , much lesse , every particular person in every nation , but to take the words as indefinitely spoken ( as opposed to the preaching to that one nation ) as there was occasion for the Apostles or other reachers to come unto them . Where it is sayd , Act. 2. 5. that there were dwelling in Ierusalem devout men out of every nation under heaven , shall we imagine that there must needs be English and Irish , and Iappanians there ? The particular enumeration of many , v. 9. 10. 11. shewes what is meant by all . When the Iewes of ▪ Asia , Act. 21. 28. accused Paul to teach all men every where against the people , and Law , and holy place , shall we be so senselesse as to think their meaning to have been , that he so taught every particular person in the world ? What is it , if this be not , for the unlearned and unstable to pervert the Scriptures to their own destruction ? Lastly , their passionate out-cry against our doctrine , as blasphemy , and as making God to dissemble in all these his sayings , as having left the greatest number in sin , without reconciliation , because he would have them damned , is to be taken as a fit of their raving , by reason of that spiritual burning feaver which possesseth and distempereth their hearts , and brains , and whole man. We doe not say that God doth any thing at all either tending to , or in the condemnation of men , because he would have them damned , but that he performs all his most just , though fearfull works about Reprobates , to shew his wrath , and make his power known against sin and sinners to the glory of his Iustice , in their deserved condemnation . Which his unsearchable iudgements and works , we do not furiously oppugne , as these their , and our adversaries doe , but admire with fear and trembling , as we are taught by the Apostles exclamation , O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God , how unsearchable are his iudgments , and his wayes past finding outs And what if the holy & iust God had left all men universally ( as having defaced his image in which they were at first created & made ) without any means or hope of remedy , as he did the Angels that sinned , had it been any more then justice in him so to have done ? And will these male-parts then sue him at the law , if he have held that course of justice towards some , which was due to all ? Will they make the grace of the Gospell a debt from God to men , or a matter of meer grace , and mercie ? Is it not of meer mercie that he calls any to life ? and but just if he leave all to themselves , and their own affected ignorances and lusts ? We doe not then impute either dissimulation or cruelty to God in any thing which he sayth or doth ▪ but deny him to say or do as they dream . Vpon the objection here framed in our name , that there are many which never heard of Christ , we doe not demand as they fondly make us , how then the Scriptures ( cited by them ) are verified ? but doe affirme that the same Scriptures are by them perverted against their right meaning . But now , how do they satisfie this objection put into our hands by the Apostle himselfe , Rom. 15. 20. Do they set themselves , as is meet , to a plain and direct answer ? Nothing lesse . But as a crafty guide meaning to deceive his inexpert passenger , leads him by many turnings , and the same perplexed , and hard to find , in which he may easily loose his aym : so doe these deceivers here , and in many other places , in stead of giving a direct answer , fetch compasse about , by bringing in by-things , some true , some false , none pertinent , in which the weaker sort of Readers cannot but loose themselves , and forget the force of the Argument brought . And by this means they rather escape Arguments then answer them . The discourse about the Law , into which they here wander , may be admitted ; onely one particular greatly weighty in it selfe , and as greatly by them mistaken , excepted . ADVERSARIES . Adams posterity , as they came to understanding , had a law . And again , the law is given to a man when he comes to understanding , and when his conscience gives him peace by keeping it , and war for breaking it , and not till then : which qualities ( say they ) are not in babes : for they discern not earthly things , and how then should they discern heavenly , &c. seeing there must be a conscience , unto which the Law is given , which infants haue not . DEFENCE . THis errour in the latter part of their speech , must the more carefully be observed , and cleerly refuted by us , because it is laid down as the ground of divers other errours , and the same not small , as will appear hereafter . Neither needs there in truth more , nor can there be any thing more cleere against them , then that which themselvs bring from Rom. 2 , their words are ; The law is written in the hearts of men in nature , who haue a conscience to excuse them , if they doe the things of the Law , &c. This form of speech , used by the Apostle of the Law , as written in mens hearts , is borrowed from Gods writing the Law in tables of stone , which had first , and by creation , been written in mens hearts , out of which it was almost quite blotted by sin . Now what is it for the Gentiles , to haue had the Law written in their hearts , in or by nature , as the Apostle speaks ? This must needs be in nature created : for in nature , as corrupted , there is no writing in , but blotting out of the Law. If by nature created , then as infants haue this nature , so haue they this naturall manuscript , or writing of Gods hand . This also the very word nature imports , signifying that which is born with a man , or with which hee is born ; comming of a word in Greek that signifies to beget , or produce , as parents doe children , and each living creature its kind : And seeing the Apostle here speaks of a Law by which men discern the differences between right and wrong ; good and evill ; honest and dishonest , in morall and main matters ; whence , and with what hand , should all , and every man and woman living in the world , even there where is no Law otherwise written or preached , haue this law and conscience thus written in their breasts , saue by the finger of God in creation ? This knowledg and conscience being the remainders of that image of God , in which all men , in Adam were made . By all which it appears evidently , that infants bring into the world with them this law of nature , and those foot-steps of Gods image in their reasonable soules ; who having in them the faculties of understanding and will , cannot possible be devoyd of all law for the ordering of the same ; to wh●ch ●aw , they are necessarily either disposed , or indispos●d ▪ 〈◊〉 it ●●●not be , that the reasonable faculties of understanding and ●●ll , ●● any of mankind , should be voyd of all vertuous , or vitious ●●sposition , and inclination at least , to the things of the law of nature , that is of God , the effects whereof they sh●w forth actually in their time . And this truth themselues , elsewhere confirm undenyably , though they think it not ; where they say , that Adams posterity ( originally , for of that state they there speak ) haue weak natures , by the which when the commandement comes , they cannot obey . This originall weakness then , is a contrary disposition to the Law of God , and to that which they were created : else it could not hinder them from obeying God actually afterward ; at least , internally , and in their hearts . Surely nothing but the Law of sin is contrary to the Law of God , warring against it , and against the law of the mind agreeing with it , as the Apostle speaketh . Neither follows it , that Infants haue no Law , because they haue not peace or warre of conscience in them ; nor can discern of earthly or heavenly things . The shewing the workes of the Law , and doing the things contained in the Law , and so the having a conscience excusing or accusing for the contrary , as the Apostle speaks , are not simply requisite for the having of the Law , nor for being conformable to it , but for the actuall obedience therunto , in particular actions . Persons are in three respects conformable to the law of God ; first , in habite , and so a godly man is a godly man , and conformable to Gods law when hee sleepeth ; secondly , in disposition or inclination , and so infants considered , either in state of creation , or regeneration , are conformable thereunto ; thirdly , in performance of particular acts of obedience , by men of discretion , for which the conscience excuseth and accuseth for the contrary . As well may these men deny , that infants are reasonable creatures , as that they are lawlesse . They can perform the works of neither ; but haue the faculties and dispositions of , and to both , which in time , and in their effects they manifest . ADVERSARIES . IN the next places follows their promised proofs , that Christ hath been , and still is offered to all that haue sinned , and that they haue put him away , and that the fault is their own , and condemnation from themselvs ; and Good freed from partiality . DEFENCE . BElike then , if God shew that mercy to one in calling him to his grace in Christ , which hee doth not to another , it is partiality with them : from which , to free him they take this pains , as if the Lord stood in need of their patronage ; wheras in truth , they but forge lies for God , as Iobs friends did , and talk deceitfully for him . Let us consider of their proofs , admitting of such as haue in them either apparant truth , or probability , and reproving the rest as there is cause . And first they erre , in saying , that the generation of Adam and Eve took notice of Christ , as they took notice of their sin ▪ seeing the notice of sin ; specially of that which is more grosse , is naturall , and the effect of the law of nature written in all mens hearts ; whereas the notice of Christ , is by supernaturall revelation . The like vain presumption , and apparant falsifying , is in the words following , that all the sonns of Noah could doe no lesse , but take knowledg of Christ , to convey it by tradition to all their generations . If it be meant , that indeed they did so . How many 1000 thousands are there at this day , which never so much as heard of Christ , at least , as God and man ; and Redeemer of mankind by his death ? For this their presumption of the ages before Christs coming in the flesh , they bring not any shew of reason , or testimony , divine or human . Onely they alledg the sacrifices of the Gentiles , which ( say they ) they either had from their ancestors , in their generations ; or as being moved by a troubled conscience , which must be quieted by sacrifice . And these sacrifices , they tell us , were remembrances of Christ , and kinds of acknowledgings of him ; though in the end , they account them no better then remembrances of a false Christ in stead of him . As their opinion is not unprobable , touching the generall beginnings of the Gentiles sacrifices ; so considering them in their particulars , their own words will judge them guilty of grosse errour in instancing them , as they doe . The question is , of Gods offering of the means of salvation to all , even to the very Heathens before Christs coming in the flesh : Their proofe for the affirmatiue , is , the sacrifices which the Gentiles had ; which yet they grant to haue been remembrances , and acknowledgments of a false Christ. And are remembrances of a false Christ means of salvation ? Is there any other name under heaven by which men are saved , then by the name of ( the true Christ ) Iesus the Son of God , crucified by the Iews , and raised again by God from the dead ? If the remembrances of a false Christ be means of salvation , then is salvation had by a false Christ. The Apostle maketh the sacrifices of the Gentiles , means of fellowship with devils ; these men make them means of fellowship with God : The Apostle teacheth , that they cannot stand with the remembrances of Christs body and bloud , the cup of the Lord , and the Lords Table ; these men make them the same in effect , and remembrances of Christ. The Apostle means of provoking the Lord to anger , and so of condemnation ; they , means of pacifying God , and of saving men . Else where , these men in their hote zeal , will haue all , even the most zealous Ministers in the Church of England , preach and pray , and doe all other things by none other spirit , but the spirit of the man of sin , and that all the effects of their so preaching and praying is , but the false enlightning and heat of a false spirit . And yet here , in their hote charity towards the heathen , they will haue their sacrifices , in which they offer to devils , and not to God ; yea , those in which they sacrificed their sonns and daughters unto them , and that as histories mention by the devils speciall direction in his Oracles ; these they will haue means of salvation , by which God cals his guests to the marriage of his Sonne , and as a good Phisit on , offers to heal the fick of sin . Thus t●ansforming God into the devill ; the true Christ into a false , the Gospell into heynous Idolatry ; and the means of salvation into the high way , and most effectual cause of utter p●●d●tion . To conclud● this point . If in Religion , that which is false be none , ( which elsewhere they make the ground of their rebaptizing ) how had or haue the Heathens any means of salvation , which haue only the means of knowing , and acknowledging a false Christ ? For the time since Christs coming in the flesh , their first p●oof is Luk. 3. 6 , All flesh shall see the salvation of our God : But I demand , of what sight of Christ Iohn here speaketh ? Not of bodily , without doubt ; neither availed it them , if he did . Of spirituall then . But so to see , is to enjoy , as Ioh. 3. 35 , Psal. 69. 49 , & 99. 15 , 1 Ioh. 3. 6. Neither doth the bare offering suffice to giue sight of Christ and of salvation by him , except there be withall an opening of their eyes to whom he is offered , so as they discern , and acknowledge him and his salvation , in the means so offering him , to wit , the Gospell . But to let passe them that never heard of Christ , how many are there that understand not the Gospell preached to them ; yea , to whom it is meer foolishnes ? And how doe these see the salvation of God in Christ ? The meaning then of the words is , that the Gentiles indefinitely , as well as the Iews , and in greater number then they , should beleev in Christ to salvation . By all Nations is meant , as we haue formerly shewed , not every particular Nation without exception , much lesse every particular person , but commonly the Gentiles with the Iews . The Sun and Moon teaching God , was as well before , as since Christ , but never taught Christ the Mediator , but onely God the Creator , and governour of the world . Neither is the Gospell , which is not known but by supernaturall revelation of the spirit , so common as the Law , which is naturall and written by creation in the heart of every man. Neither should it be a fault , if God offered not Christ to all , as they most absurdly insinuate . He ows not the offering of him to any , more then the giving of him for any . All is of mercy , and therfore no fault , but justice onely where no such offer is . Where they affirm afterwards , and truely , that some to whom Christ is offered , put him away quite , as Iews , and Turks . I demand , how then they keep and practise any remembrances of him , or make any acknowledging of him , which even now they affirmed every man in the world to doe ? Or if the fathers put him quite away , how can the children haue , or make any remembrance , or acknowledgment of him , having no new offer of him ? Can that which is quite put away be still continued ? That Christ might haue been manifested to every particular person whatsoever , to wit , if God had so pleased ; is true : but both besides the question , which is not , what God might haue done , or doth , but what hee hath done , or doth ; and also against themselvs ; for to say , God might haue done a thing , is to insinuate that he hath not done it . In adding , that if the means of salvation haue not been offered to every particular soule of reason , and understanding , the Scriptures are not true , they are like themselvs ; but the Scriptures are true , and their glosse upon them false . God is true , and all men lyars ; even such as tell a lye for God , as they doe , whom God will reproov therefore . The two last kinds of their proofs are strange , and either brought by them in cunning , to deceiv the undiscerning Reader ; with the truth in it selfe , but nothing to the ma●n purpose , yea plain against it ; or in weaknesse and want of judgment in themselvs to discern what makes for them and what against them . Let us consider the particulars . They professe and promise proof , that Christ hath been offered in mercy to every particular man ( to whom the Law , either written in mens hearts , or in tables of stone hath come ) for reconciliation : But in steed hereof ( as Balaam blessed when he meant to curse ) they both affirm and prov the plain contrary , and that God hath not vouchsafed this mercy to many , but in just judgment hath kept it from them . Sundry true grounds they here lay down , and prove ; to which we willingly assent : as first , that God by creating the heaven and earth , and by their teachings , sends men to seek out the worke-master . This we grant ; and that the Heathens should by this light ( not of Christ to salvation , of which our question is , but ) of Gods power and Godhead , haue gr●ped after God , and the further revelation of h●s will : as he that lying in a dungeon , sees some little glimpse of light , and groaps aft●r it , by the wall , hoping to come in time to some dore or window . A second is , that the terrours of conscience accusing them for sin , should haue caused them to seek after God with earnestnesse , for reconciliation . And to this , we assent also . A third is , that it is not Gods fault , but their own , that they are ignorant of the means of reconciliation and salvation . And of this also we are perswaded , as they , so far as there is a fault . But now what did those Heathens in this case ? They became vain in their thoughts , and their foolish hearts were full of darkenesse , so as they turned the glory of the incorruptible God to Idols : satisfying themselvs in their own inventions : And this also , as consonant to the Scriptures , we willingly admit of ? And what then ? God for this ( say they ) delivered them up to a reprobate minde , that they never knew more : for , what should he that is not faithfull in a little , be trusted with more ? Luk. 16. 10 , and gaue them up to their own hearts lusts , and so they became past feeling . And to consent with them herein also , the Scriptures leade us very directly . But what now follows of all this for conclusion ? Namely , that all Nations , Citties , houses , &c. that is , every particular man , and woman , hath had the mercy of God in the offer of Christ affoarded them ; that all were bidden to the marriage . Nay , the plain contrary ; and that all were not bidden : but that many in stead of this mercy to be bidden , were in justice left to themselvs , and given up to their own vain imaginations ; the Lord suffering all the Nations to walk in their own waies , as the Apostle saith , and refusing ( as themselvs confesse ) to trust them with much , which had not been faithfull in a little , so as they never knew more . And whereas they cunningly shuffle in , now and then , that men might haue had Christ given unto them , or offered them , and that Christ might haue been manifested to every one if they had would ( how congruously to the Scriptures they speak therein we now dispute not ) is not onely besides the matter in controversie ; which is , what was , and is , and not what might haue been done ; but to their own prejudice , feeing that which onely might haue been , is not , specially that bar being put by mens own default , which effectually hinders the being of it , as in this case . Having thus shewed that these men either fight busily with their own shadows , in proving at large things never called into question by us ; or may easily haue their weapons turned upon themselvs , in the main matter : I will even now proceed , after that I haue briefly observed some particular mistakings by them . And first , they both add to the Text , and err in applying that which is written , Rom. 11. 32. The Scripture is , God hath concluded them all in unbeliefe , that he might haue mercie upon all , they add , of their own , every person : whereas the Apostle neither speaks of every person ; but onely of the Gentiles indefinitely at one time , and of the Iews at another , which he there opposeth the one to the other : neither speaks he of the offering of grace and mercy onely , as they deem ; but of the actuall conferring of it upon all , of whom there he speaks , who beleeved and obtained mercy ; the other remaining in unbeleef . And this , both the drift and words of the place expresly manifest , v. 30. 31. 32. Neither doth that other place alledged , Tit. 2. 11 , speak of all , and every particular person , but of persons of all sorts , servants as well as masters , or any others . The Apostle v. 9 , & 10 , provokes beleeving servants to obedience to their masters ; rend●ing this reason of encouragement , v. 11 , for the grace of God which bringeth salvation unto all , hath appeared , as if he should say , that even they , though poor bond-slaves , if they continued in faith , and faithfull obedience , should haue their part in the salvation of God , as well as any others . Secondly , as I will not simply deny , that God punished the Heathens other sins with the want of preaching Christ unto them ; so is it certain , that greater sinners , and deeplyer drowned both in idolatry , and other lusts , none in the world were , then the Corinthians , Athenians , Ephesians , and others to whom Christ was preached , and faith thereby given to many unto salvation . The Lord tels the Prophet , that though the house of Israel , to whom he was sent , would not hear , yet if he had sent him to the Heathens , surely they would haue heard him : So the Lord Iesus upbraids the cities of Chorah , Bethsaida , and Capernaum , where he both preached , and wrought most of his mighty works , that they were deeper in the contempt of God , and further from all disposition to use aright the means of salvation , then the Heathenish Cities of Tyre and S●don , yea , of Sodom it selfe : unto whom yet he vouchsafed not the means of repentance , and revelation of grace , which he did to the former . By which , it doth appear , that the Lord doth not observ the order prescribed unto him by these men , for the dispensing of his favours this way , in trusting them with most , who are of their faithfull in a little ; ( that is , wholly faithlesse indeed ; ) but as the wind blows where it lists , so doth he by the sweet gusts of his Gospell , and spirit , according to the good pleasure of his own will , ( and not according to the good pleasure of mens will , in their use of naturall light and conscience ) dispense supernaturall grace , both for means , and efficacy . Lastly , as they here contradict their main ground of universall calling , in supposing some Nation to haue no means of knowing Christ : so I would learn of them , how the Gentiles ( wholly voyd of faith ) could rightly examine all things , touching the offence of God , an accusing conscience , and the satisfying of Gods justice , as they would haue them : or in so doing , could promise to themselvs the revelation of Christ by one means or other , as they liberally undertake for them ? They tell us , He that seeks shall find , Math. 7. But we answer them , that Christ there speaks not of a seeking by blind , and unbeleeving Gentiles , but by his faithfull Disciples . Now , albeit the eternall and unchangeable election of God doe not manifest it selfe , in time , in the bare outward calling of the so elected , common to many others with them ; but as the same hath joyned with it the effectuall work of true faith and repentance in the heart , peculiar to them alone : Yet seeing these adversaries labour upon presumption of an universall grace offered to all in the preaching of the Gospell , to establish an uniuersall election of all , ( that is , in truth , to overthrow all election ) I will here annex , to the things formerly laid down , two or three plain testimonies for th●● further conviction . The first ●s from the Psalm : He shewed his word unto Iacob , his statutes and his judgements unto Israel : He hath not dealt so with any Nation , and as for judgements , they haue not known them . The Heathens therfore ( if we will giue credit to the word of God had not the knowledg of Gods word , & so not of the Gospel , which is most hidden , as being of supernatural revelation onely . Of the same Gentiles the Apostle testifieth , that God in times past suffered them all to walk in their own wayes : that is , did not manifest Christ unto them for faith in his bloud , and repentance through him , but onely his power and God-head , giving them rain from heaven , and other bodily blessings to witnesse the same . With this accords that elswhere : The times of this ignorance ( which had been amongst the Gentiles before Christ ) God regarded not , or winked at : but now commandeth all men every where ( as well Gentiles as Iewes ) to repent . The Apostle opposeth the time now , in which he preached , to the former times : and shews that God now , and not in times past , called all to repentance by the preaching of the word . To conclude , the same Apostle expresly teacheth , that there is no salvation but by beleeving in the name of the Lord Iesus , by the preaching of the word and Gospell , by preachers sent of God , for that end . But now for any to say , that every particular person in the world hath had , or hath the word of the Gospell preached unto him by a preacher sent of God for that purpose , were an assertion of him whose impudencie better deserved a club , then any grounds that possibly he could lay , a refutation ; considering both the infallible experience of all ages , and testimony of scripture to the contrary , and that there were places even in the latter end of the last Apostles time , where Christ had not been named , nor spoken of . Next follows to be examined their exposition upon Rom. 9 , in the introduction whereunto ▪ they mingle truth with errour . They deal craftily in bearing the Reader in hand , that the disputation of Paul herein is hard , and the matter darkly handled , that so they may turn the thoughts of the Reader from it ; or at least dim them with prejudice against that plain and evident truth of Gods free election , and reprobation joyned therewith ; Both which things he sets down most clearly ( though the reason of the Lords different dealing towards them , that are in themselves alike , he makes unsearchable , and determines in the free purpose of his will ) if men did not trouble the pure and cleare water of Gods sanctuary with the foul feet of their corrupt glosse . They also erre in makeing this one of the places in Pauls Epistles , of which the Apostle Peter speaketh , 2. Pet. 3. 16. Peter doth not say , neither wil the Greek text beare it , that there are things hard in Pauls Epistles ; but that in those matters in his Epistles ( to wit , about the day of the Lords comming , and the dissolution of the heavens and elements , and the new heavens and new earth promised ) were things hard to understand , &c. Their perverting of the Scriptures , ( which they lay to the charge of others ) both in the Epistles of Peter and Paul , and every where else , wee haue formerly disclosed . Neither do we affirm , as they here charge us , that God reprobates either the greatest number , or any , as they understand , and elsewhere expound themselves , that is , predestinates them to condemnation without any condition . Hee predestinates none to condemnation ; or which is all one purpose , to condemne none , but for sin freely by them to be practised , as the fore-going cond●tion , and onely deserving cause of condemnation . Neither say we ( as they slander us ) that God denieth means of salvation to men , because he would haue them perish ; but as the Apostle reacheth , that he hardens ( by that and other his holy dispensations ) whom he will , that he might shew his wrath , and make his power known upon the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction . ADVERSARIES . LEt us now come to their exposition . The scope ( say th●y ) as of the whole Epistle , so of this chapter , is , that not the Law , but the Gospell is the power of God to salvation : and that we are not justified by the workes of the Law , but by faith , even that faith which Abraham had . DEFENCE . AS the proper and particular scope of divers parts of this Epistle , is divers ; so do they misse of the drift of this particular chapter , which is not ( as they conceive ) to prove justification not to be by the workes of the Law , but by the faith of Christ in the Gospell : But to shew that the first and highest cause , why , of all mankinde faln in Adam , one is cleared , and another not , is onely the good pleasure , and free wil of God , and not mans deservings : and yet that God in so choosing , or electing one before another , doth nothing unjustly , as shall appeare in the particulars hereafter to bee explained : and may in the mean while be gathered by these three generall reasons . First , for the Apostle , when of purpose he handles the matter of justification by faith , chap. 3. & 4. doth so oft and againe iterate and inculcate the terms of Faith , and Iustification , almost in every verse whereas here , he never so much as once mentions either of them in the disputation it selfe . which is to the end of vers . 24. where he descends from the matter of election to the calling of the elected , both of Iewes and Gentiles . Secondly , it is unreasonable to conceive , that the Apostle , having in the third and fourth chapter so fully handled , and so expresly concluded that matter of Iustification by faith , and not by works ; and chap. 7. the effect and end thereof , Peace with God , and perseverance to salvation ; and chap. 6. the matter of sanctification ; and chap. 7. the imperfection of that sanctification in this life ; and chap. 8. the afflictions of the faithfull , and their perseverance notwithstanding to the death ; should now again without any occasion , and against all order , return to the same matter of justification , so fully handled and ended before . This might wel agree with these mens wandrings in this their treatise , but agrees not with the wisdom either divine or humane wherewith the Apostle was furnished . Much more absurd is it to imagine , that having formerly handled that subject matter of justification so plainly as he hath done , chap. 3 , and 4. he should returne to handle the same matter so darkly and obscurely , as all the adversaries to the truth , and fautors of this conceit , are compelled to confesse he hath done in this place . Thirdly , if this were the Apostles proper drift , what needed he to have made such deep protestation of his hearty sorrow for the Iewes as he did , more in this place then in the former , where he handled that matter more clearly then here ? It was in truth no other thing that moved the man of God to these sad and sorrowfull protestations , then to remov the offence which might be taken at the Iews rejection , and calling of the Gentiles in their stead ; of which , and the highest cause thereof , hee was now to speak in the 9. 10. and 11. chapters . Lastly , we shall ( God willing ) make it appear in sundry particulars , that these Adversaries , by wresting of some things , and omitting of others , pervert the Apostles words to a strange sense , how soever they think to get advantage by striking others first with that imputation . And first , though they account it plain , and without difficulty , that the Apostles meaning v. 5 , & 6 , is , that not all the Israelits , not all the children of Abrahams flesh specially , not such as boasted of the observation of the Law , were therefore in the state of salvation , or should be saved : yet in truth , he plainly means another thing ; namely , that all Israel , all that were the seed of Abraham , and children of the flesh , were not that Israel , that seed , those children to whom the promise was made : that is , were not they touching whom God by his promise declared his purpose of election mentioned , v. 11. For though all are saved that receiv the promise by faith , and none by the works of the Law , yet the Apostle in this place , neither speaks a word of salvation ( as the effect of the promise ) but of election ( as the cause therof : ) nor yet of mens receiving the promise by faith ; but of Gods making it , according to election ; that so the purpose of God , and promise manifesting it , might stand according to election , v. 11 , that the word of God might take effect , v. 6. even the word of promise ; At this time will I come &c. v. 9 , they are then called children of the promise , not because they received , but because the promise ( Sara shall haue a Son , &c. ) was made unto them , according to the election of grace , and stableness of Gods purpose , v. 8. 9. 11 , which promise also , they did in time , receiv by faith , according to the election of that remnant from the rest , the promise following the purpose of election ; and faith , and salvation by it following the purpose and promise . Though Israel , that is , all which were of Israel , obtained not that which he seeketh for , yet the election hath obtained it ; even the remnant of Israel , to whom Gods promise is , according to the election of grace : in regard of which remnant according to election , the word of God is effectuall , and the promise fulfilled touching the yonger son of Rebeca : of whose two sonns , it was said before they were born , or had done either good or evill , the elder shall serv the yonger . And as they truely affirm , that neither birth nor works did prefer with God : so I demand here , what those works were , by which Esau sought for justification ? The Scriptures expresly term him a prophane person ; that is , a despiser of goodnes ; yea , of his very birth-right , which was a speciall legall priviledg : How then sought he to be preferred with God , and justified for birth or works ? Or how doth this example of Esau fit their imagined plain exposition ? specially to proue that the children of Abrahams flesh were not in the salvation , who so much boasted of being Moses disciples in the observation of the Law : when as the Law of Moses was not yet given , nor the Law-giver born . Their words following , that God purposeth to prefer those that seek it by his free election , through faith in Christ , are true in themselvs , but not in their sense . Their meaning is , that God purposed to saue them effectually that should beleev in Christ Iesus : whereupon should be meant in this place onely , such a purpose of God as was no more towards Iakob then towards Esau : for God , by their doctrine , purposed to chuse Esau if he beleeved ; and not Iakob but upon his beleeving first . But the Apostle speaks more then evidently of such a purpose of God , as was towards Iakob particularly and alone , excluding Esau. Besides the standing of this purpose , and election , are here noted as two distinct things ; of which , election is the former , and that according to which this purpose of God stands : whereas they make them one and the same , accounting election nothing but the purpose of bestowing salvation upon them that beleev . Thirdly , the Apostle cannot mean such a purpose and election as presupposeth faith in Christ , ( which they would haue ) seeing he expresly affirms it to haue been when the children had done neither good nor evill . Is to beleev in Christ , to pu● on the wedding garment by faith , and obedience , to submit to the righteousnesse of God ( which they will haue the condition upon vvhich election depends , and the quality for which God elects the persons in whom he finds it ) are these to doe no good with with these men ? and is the doing of the contrary to doe no evill ? Lastly , he saith not , that the purpose of God , according to election might stand , not of vvorks ▪ but of faith , as they say : but not of vvorks , but of him that calleth ; that is , as followeth , that vvill haue mercy on whom he vvill haue mercy . By which it is plain , that Paul doth not in this chapter ( as chap. 3. and 4 , and Gal. 4 , ) oppose works and faith ; but vvorks , and Gods calling : He should haue said for their purpose ; that the purpose of God stands not of works but of faith , or of him that beleeveth : and not , as hee doth for the purpose of the Holy Ghost , of him that calleth : Shewing thereby his meaning to be in this whole discourse , that the obtaining of righteousnesse , or standing of Gods purpose in its actuall effect , depends upon God alone , according to three degrees here expressed : first , his gracious purpose of election in himselfe towards some : secondly , his free promise manifesting his purpose : thirdly , his effectuall calling , in which his vvord of promise hath effect , and his purpose stands firm and undisappointed , notwithstanding the unbeleif of the body of Abrahams seed . Their making Iakob and Esau types as they doe , is like the rest , or worse . The Scriptures are not to be drawn from their natural & simple sense , without apparant warrant . It is the high way to heresie , to be bold in framing typical expositions . And with what spirit these men are led this way , appears by their expounding the parable , Luk. 15 , making the Iews the elder brother , vvho sought salvation by vvorks ; and the Gentles , the yonger in the offer of the Gospell , seeking salvation onely by the free promise of God : wheras the plain meaning of Christ is , onely to avow his preaching to the Publicans and sinners resorting unto him , against the pride and envy of the Pharisies ; those Publicans and sinners being Iews as well as the other . Secondly , I demand , what it was , in which Iakob typed out beleevers , seeking righteousnesse by God ? and in which Esau typed out workers , seeking justification by their own works ? The contrary in Esau is expressed in the Scriptures . Lastly , seeing it cannot be denyed , but that Iakob as a faithfull and godly man was in time actually beloved of God , and Esau , as godlesse and prophane , actually hated ; it must needs follow , that God before the world was , purposed in himself accordingly , to loue the one and hate the other : seeing whatsoever God in time doth , by way of emanation or application to , and upon the creature , that he purposed to do , as he doth it , from eternity . If the Apostle , v. 13 , Iakob haue I loved , and Esau haue I hated , confirm his former doctrine , as they say , then he confirms the doctrine of Gods eternall and stedfast election from eternity . And their boldnesse is excessiue in calling them perverters of the words of Paul , which will haue this to be before Iakob and Esau were born : seeing the Apostle adds this Scripture out of Malachy , to shew the reason of that contained in the former , which both Moses and Paul with him , expresly affirm to haue been before the children were born : namely , that the highest cause of the elder , ( to wit , Esau ) his serving the yonger , ( to wit , Iakob ) was Gods loue to Iakob , and hatred of Esau. That following is partly true , namely , that v. 12. & 13 , is not shewed for what cause God loved Iakob and hated Esau : for that is shewed so far as God would haue us see , v. 15. 18. But fals , where they say , that they shew not when this was . For this loue and hatred was ( and before ) when God said , The elder shall serv the yonger : and this he said , when the children were not yet born : the effect of which was , that the purpose of God according to election might stand in after time , and that both in respect of the two persons themselvs , and of the bodies of the Nations to come of them , though not of every particular . And so indeed they are to be considered both as instances in their persons , and heads of their Nations ; the Scriptures accordingly every where testifying , that God loved , and chose from the rest , the Israelits in their fathers Abraham , Isaak , and Iakob , according to the tenour of his gracious promise and covenant of being their God , and the God of their Seed , expressing his eternall , and most stedfast purpose of will. That which they adde in the last place of Gods not hating ( to wit actually ) and destroying without desert , is most true . But when we speak of Gods loving or hating any before the world , we mean onely of his decree of loving , which he actually exerciseth in time for Christs righteousnesse by faith applyed upon the so loved ; and so of his decree of hating , which hatred he comes not to exercise actually , but for sin deserving it . God from eternity purposed in time to glorifie his justice in the deserved destruction of Esau , and not of Iakob . Of this different decree of God , touching Esau , and not Iakob , and his leaving him in and to his own corruption , and hardning him in the same , rather then Iakob , our reason is , the will of God ; but of Gods actuall hating and destroying of him rather then the other , the Scriptures shew sufficient reason , to wit , his obstinacy in sin , the onely cause of his destruction . Vers. 14 , upon the premises , that God of two alike in themselvs , and without respect of good or evill , in the one , or other , had loved the one , and hated the other , an objection is framed , that by this , injustice might seem to be with God : which the Apostle denyes , with God forbid . This objection our Adversaries understand to be upon Gods rejecting the fleshly Israelites , for contemning their salvation offered them by faith in Christ , as Esau was rejected for contemning his birth-right . But herein ( as children skip , where they cannot reade ) they leav out the principall part of the objection , which is not onely moved upon Gods rejecting some , but withall upon his receiving of others . The Apostle in the words before going ( which occasion the objection ) mentions not onely Esau the elder hated , and serving ; but also Iakob the yonger loved , and served : so in answering the same objection , he speaks first , and most of Gods shewing mercy and compassion , and last and least of his hardning any . Now whether they have omitted this part of the objection in cunning or inconsideratenesse , themselves best know . This is certain , that the adjoyning it , qutie overturns their exposition . For comparing together two such persons , as whereof the one glories in his own righteousnesse , as perfectly answering to the holinesse and righteousnesse of the Law ; justifying himselfe , when the Law condemnes him ; despising the grace and mercy of God in Christ offered , and making him a lyar in not receiving the testimony which he gives of his Son and joyning with these , blasphemy and persecution , and all injurious dealing against them that doe receive this grace of Christ all which those proud justiciaries , and carnall Israelits did : and the other , as honoring Gods justice and holinesse , in the sense , and confession of sin , and misery due therefore ; flying to the mercie of God in Christ , and by receiving the testimony of his Sonn , setting to his seal that God is true ; and therewith repenting with all his heart , which every true beleever doth that God now should shew mercie upon the latter of these , and not upon the former , cannot minister to any man , indued with common sense , occasion of objecting injustice to God ; seeing the light of nature teacheth every naturall man the reason of a difference . And if any should be so senselesse , as to object injustice to God in such a case ( as they conceive the objecter to be ) yet was not the Apostle so witlesse , as to fly for answer to the absolute will of God , and to plead , that God will doe so , because he will or pleaseth to doe it , as v. 15. 18. I will haue mercie on whom I will have mercie , &c. Which answer of the Apostle also ministers matter of further and more difficult objection , as appeares v. 19. 20. Whereas if the objection had been cast in their mould , a child could have answered it and sayd , that it had been a most just and equall thing for God to have received and loved the one rather then the other ; considering how the one honored the holynesse , justice , truth , and mercy of God ; which the other dishonored and despised . They erre therefore in applying to this purpose Rom. 2. 4. 5. Neither doth the Apostle there speak of a mercy and bounty , to be shewed to them that beleeve , and repent , as they conceive ; but of that which goes before repentance , as a means to lead unto it : But here he speaks of a higher work of Gods shewing mercy ; namely , the purpose of his will according to election to glory ; and the means thereunto . And truely , these mens boldnesse is too great in putting , for , God hath mercy on whom he wil have mercy ; God hath mercie on them that seek him by the means that he himselfe appoynts . For though it be most true , that God hath mercie on such ; yet the Apostle here speaks no more of Gods appoynting or commanding will for his shewing of mercy , then of his appoynting or commanding vvill for his hardening , v 18 , whom he will he hardens . He speaks of that will , according to which he himselfe works in loue or hatred : not of that according to which he commands and appoints men to worke . These men in truth confound all things , setting mans will where Gods should stand . God saith , on whom I will : they say , on him that himselfe wils , or seeketh as he ought , &c. The same Idol of mans wil they advance & set up , v. 16 , where in stead , of Gods shewing mercy ; they put , mans beleeving mercy . The Lord by willing , and running , v. 16 , excludes whatsoever is of , or in man , and either within , or without him : and draws all to himselfe alone . In the stead of God shewing mercy , they put themselvs , and their free - will receiving mercy by God offered , as the proper cause of difference between man , and man. The 17 vers . For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh , &c , they handle very sleightly : saying something ( such as it is ) about Gods hardening Pharoahs heart ; but not medling at all with the place , according to the coherence which it hath with the words going before : unto which , yet the Holy Ghost strongly tyeth them , in saying ▪ For the Scripture saith , &c. And herein they are in truth , wise in their generation . These words must needs answer to the latter part of the objection of unrighteousnesse with God in hating ; that is , as they interpret it , in rejecting such as seek righteousnesse by the works of the Law , as did the fleshly Israelits . But wherein , I wonder , did Pharaoh so ? How sought he justification by the works of the Law ? Who so professedly despised the God therof , saying , Who is the Lord that I should obey his voyce ? Did they see , that this example of Pharaoh , and their exposition of the place could not stand together ; and therfore chose to cut off the coherence so firmly tying the words together , rather then to let fall their preconceived erroneous exposition ? Whatsoever they intend herein , we know it is brought for an example of Gods absolute ( but righteous ) power of hardening ( rather then another ) whom he will ; and not whom he finds most deserving it ; ( for whom finds he not too much deserving it , if he would deal in like manner with all ? ) as it is said , whom ( that is , which rather then other ) he will , he hardneth , v. 18. And let it be diligently minded , that the Apostle here opposeth Gods shewing mercy to some , and his hardening of others ; and not his shewing mercy to some , and his condemning of others . The adversaries , by Gods shewing mercy , would haue us understand his saving of such , as beleev and repent . And then , on the contrary , by Gods hardening , should onely be meant his not shewing mercy to , but punishing & condemning such as doe not beleev , nor repent . But we know , that the not hearing God voyce , not beleeving , and repenting follow upon hardnesse of heart . Wherupon the Lord promiseth , that in the day of his mercy , and pittie , he will take from his people their stony and hard hearts . And so touching Pharaoh , the Scriptures expresly shew , that his hardnesse of heart was the cause of his unbeliefe , and disobedience . Whereupon I conclude evidently , that the Apostle here speaks not of such a mercy onely , as follows faith ( as the Adversaries would haue him ) but as goes before it also : as he speaks of such a hardening as go●s before unbelief . Note we here also , that the Apostle in this place propounds Gods will as the cause of his dealing diversly with divers persons ; and not of his saving such as are to be saved , after a divers manner from that , which some , namely the carnall Israelites imagined . ADVERSARIES . NOW to return to them . They lay down a question thus . What is the meaning of the hardening of Pharaoh ? And in their answer wholly passe by God , as no doer in the businesse . They make Pharaoh a doer in hardening his own heart , which is true ; and Satan a doer in hardening Pharaohs heart , and this is true also ; but God no doer , but a sufferer only , in giving him up , that is , as else where they expound it , in leaving him to himselfe , and to Satan , to be hardened . DEFENCE . BVT first , the Text imports a further thing in God , whom it brings in thus speaking . For this same purpose haue I raised thee up , that I might shew my power in thee , and that my name might be declared through all the earth . Is Gods raysing up ( which is his hardening , v. 8 , ) nothing but his letting a man lie still , and fall down lower then he was before ? Besides , the end , which was the glory of Gods power and name , shews God to be a worker . Every end must haue an efficient or working cause . The glory of God was not the end of Satans work , nor of Pharaohs work ; and therefore of Gods work in it . Thirdly , God hardened Pharaohs heart , by sending Moses and Aaron unto him , as by an occasion , though not a cause ; as the Law is the occasion of sin ; and the Gospell the occasion of strife and variance . Fourthly , God deprived Pharaoh of the use of common sense and reason ; otherwise it could not haue been , that after so many experiments by him taken of Gods powerfull hand against him , and for the Israelits , he should so furiously as he did , haue followed them into the middest of the Sea. Lastly , besides , and aboue all these , God , in whose hands the hearts of Kings are , as the rivers of waters , to turn them whether he will , hardened Pharaohs heart , by ordering his pride , cruelty and contempt of God to this effect of obstinacy , appearing in his most desperate course ; without which powerfull , and unerring hand of God ( all the former notwithstanding ) it might haue come to passe that Pharaohs heart might haue been softned by the miracles and means used ; and so Gods word , which before had foretold his hardening , might not haue taken effect ; which is , contrary to the truth , and drift of the Apostle in this place . God therefore was not onely a sufferer , but a doer in the hardening of Pharaoh . ADVERSARIES . THeir next question is , How consider you these words : Who hath resisted his will ? v. 19. Vnto which they frame this untoward Answer , viz. that those Iews seeking salvation by those works of the Law did not resist Gods will , and so gaue him no cause to complain . DEFENCE . NOthing lesse , as we haue shewed , and shall further manifest by and by , from the Apostles answer , v. 20. The meaning is plain . The words v. 19 , Thou wilt then say unto me , why doth he yet finde fault , for who hath resisted his will ? are an objection against that which immediately went before ; whom he will , he hardeneth . Now against this , it may colourably bee objected , that if God hardens whom he will , hee hath then no reason to complain of mens being hardened in disobedience ; for Who can resist his will , if he will harden them ? A piece of an eie is sufficient to see the plainnesse of this exposition , and coherence . Their discourse then following , that God would saue all , and haue all repent , amend , and beleev , is frivolous . The objection is of Gods will to harden men ; their answer is of Gods will to soften them by repentance . ADVERSARIES . HEre they lay against their Adversaries ( Gods friends ) two false accusations : First , that they make God hate Esau , and Pharaoh , and the Reprobates before they be born : from which hatred he decreed their damnation : and that , by his secret will , which cannot be resisted : to which the will of God , declared in the Scripture , is contrary : secondly , that ▪ God compelled Pharaoh to trespasse , and so to suffer . DEFENCE . BY the Law , the false accuser must be done by , as he would doe by his brother . These mens slanders therefore being false , are as odious in them , as were the opinions odious in us , if true . First , we know that God hates none before the world , otherwise then they are , and that they are no otherwise then in Gods decree , and foreknowledge . He hates none actually , or by application of hatred , till they haue actuall , yea sinfull being ; but hates them before in decree onely , as they are onely in decree and foreknowledge . This decree of God we consider according to two objects , Sin and Condemnation : For sin ▪ we say , that God decrees to suffer the sin , which he could hinder by his almighty power , if he would , and to order both sin and sinner , both before he sin , and in sinning , and having sinned , to his own holy ends . For damnation , we hold , that God decrees it towards none , but for their sin , by him infallibly foreseen , and by them freely to be committed and continued in without repentance . For though God be moved onely from within himselfe , and the loue of his holinesse , to decree the condemnation of a sinner ; yet doth lie not so decree to condemn him , but for sin , as the deserving cause , foreseen , and by him to be practised . Neither yet doe either of these decrees passe forth from God for themselvs , but both the one , and the other for the glory of his power and justice to be made known to men and Angels , v. 22. Neither is the secret and revealed will of God held by us , contrary one unto another , as they mis-judg● no not though he will that by the one , called revealed , which can be resisted ▪ and will not , but will that by the other , called secret , which cannot be resisted , I say , though God will the same thing by the one , which he nils by the other : for some things God wils by both : for example , the repentance of Paul and Peter , and of all that doe repent . It is his revealed will which requires it ; but his secret and unknown will to giue it , till he make it known by giving it . Neither doth the willing and not willing , ( no nor nilling , which is more ) of the same thing , make two contrary wils , saue as they crosse one another in the same respect , else they are but divers in respect of divers objects in consideration . To open this a little further . It was the revealed , or commanding will of God , that Pharaoh should let Israel goe : but so it was not his secret , or working will ; that is , God did not so will this , as that he would use his omnipotent power , and doe what he could to bring it to passe . God , who turned the heart of Laban , persecuting Iakob , and of Saul , persecuting the Christians ; and in whose hands are the hearts of Kings as the rivers of waters , which hee turneth whethersoever hee wils , could ( had it so pleased him ) by his irresistable power haue softned Pharaohs heart towards his people Israel . It was Gods revealed will ( wherewith Moses acquainted him ) that he should let the people goe : his secret will , which he knew not , till he felt the woefull effects of it , to harden his heart for the declaration of his power in his deserved destruction . So for Abrahams offering up his son Isaak , it was Gods revealed will , that he should offer him up for a burnt offering , as is plain , in that he commanded him so to doe , v. 1. 2 ; yet withall , it was Gods secret will , that he should not offer him , nor lay his hand upon him , nor doe any thing unto him ; as he also revealed unto him in due time , but purposed in himselfe before : God being without variablenesse , or shadow of turning , and not to be conceived to haue changed his mind , as vain man doth ; yet were not these two wils contrary one to another , but divers , not in God , in whom all things are one ( even one God ) but in respect of divers objects and ends . God willed Isaaks offering , so far as the commanding will reached , for the tryall of Abrahams faith and obedience , and this he revealed : But now God would not haue him offered , in regard of the event of the thing : but this as secret for the present , and till God revealed it in its time . Neither doe we ( or the Apostle whose steps we tread in ) by teaching that God hardens men by a will that cannot be resisted , say ( as they ignorantly accuse us and him ) that God compels men to trespass , and so to suffer . There is no compulsion of any , but of him that is unwilling : but he that is hardned , is willingly hardned , as well as necessarily . His hardning of himselfe in a course of sin , is as voluntary , as is Gods hardning him by way of punishment , necessary and irresistible . The Apostle teacheth , how it is impossible for these who were once enlightned , & have tasted of the heavenly gift , &c. if they fall away to renue them again to , or by repentance . If it be impossible for them to repent , then they remain impenitent necessarily by Gods just judgment upon them , and yet I suppose , voluntarily also , even our adversaries being Iudges . Their impenitency therefore and hardnesse of heart , though in regard of men a sin , and therefore voluntary : it is in regard of God a punishment , and therefore necessary and irresistable , except we will say , that men can resist Gods judgments : and doe that which the Apostle affirmes to be impossible . Neither needs this deep and divine mystery of Gods judgments trouble any that considers aright of these three things . First , that as the Sun puts no ill savour into the dung-hill , though the stink therof be increased by its shining : so neither doth God add any hardnesse , or impenitency to any , but onely leaves unrestrained , occasions , stirrs up , and orders the corruption which he finds in men to this event . Secondly , that man is more willing to be impenitent , and hard-hearted , then God is to have him so . Thirdly , that this , in regard of man is a sin : in regard of God , a punishment of former sins . The Apostles answer to the objection now followeth , v. 20. Nay , but O man , who art thou that disputest with God ? shall the thing formed say to him that formed it , why hast thou made me thus ? Hath not the potter power over the clay , of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor , and another to dishonor ? Wherein first , he represseth mans insolency , who being but man , yet dare presume to call Gods doing into question . 2. He justifies the Lords doing by his absolute power over the creature , as the potter hath power over his clay . And by this answer of the Apostle it appeares , how these men mistake his meaning in the question . His answer is not at all of this or that manner of saving men , ( as they imagine and maintain ) but of the saving of this person rather then that : they being both alike in themselves , and as the clay of the same lump . If Pauls answer should be shaped according to their misformed question , then the meaning must be ; that the potter might chuse which way he would make a vessell of honor , whether by the workes of the Law , or by faith and obedience to the Gospell : and so not of the same lump , but of two contrary lumps : the one beleeving and obeying ; the other , not turning from hi● wicked way ▪ and yet seeking salvation by his worke● . The Apostle here plainly pleads the Lords power over the creature , to make him a vessell of honor or dishonor : they plead the Lords power over the means onely , by which he will do this . He , the Lords power over the clay of the same lump : but they , over clay of clean contrary qualities . Besides , if Paul meant here to bring in the Iewes defending themselves , that God had no cause to complain that they stuck to the Law , that is , looked to be justified by it , seeing Gods will was that men should obey his Lawes , and so live in them , what needed he to haue sought so farre for an answer , as the absolute power of God ? seeing he had an answer at hand which might have stopped all mouthes , and which he ever presseth when question is of justification by the works of the Law ? which is , that they could not fulfill the Law , and therefore could not possibly be justified by it . Lastly , their exposition of these words , Why hast thou made me thus ? that is , that I cannot obtain salvation by the workes of the Law , directly crosseth the Apostle , who grants that God made men , as is there ▪ objected , and justifies him in so making or framing them , both in his decree , and work of holy providence , by the power which he hath over men , as the potter over his clay , Hath not the potter power over the clay ? &c. Besides , men make themselves uncapable of salvation by the Law , in that they keep it not . But the Apostle here speaks of Gods making men , vessels unto dishonor , and not of mens making themselves ; and of the potter making the vessell , and not of the vessels making it self thus , or thus . It is plain Paul grants the objection , that no man can resist Gods will ; and yet justifies his complaining , considering his power over his creature to decree , and so to bring unto most contrary estates by just and convenient meanes , persons in themselves alike , and as the clay of one lump , v. 21. 22. 23. ADVERSARIES . IN the opening of these verses they follow their usuall , but ill custome of carrying the Reader away to other places , and things : and enter upon a tedious discourse upon Ier. 18. from whence they affirme , the Apostle hath these words , and so speaks of the same making of a vessell of dishonor with the prophet in that place . DEFENCE . I Deny their peremptory assertion , and require their proof . If they say the same words are there ; first , that is not simply true ; for part of them onely are there to be found , and so are they in other places , by name Esay 45. 9. where it is evident , the Prophet speaks of another matter . It is too weak a collection , that because the like phrase or form of speech in part , is to be found in two places , that therefore the one is taken out of the other , and that to the same purpose . And to put the matter out of doubt , it is evident that the Prophet , and Apostle speak of clean divers things : the Prophet speaks of marring the vessell , and making it again ; that is , of destroying persons or peoples , if they repent not ; or doing good to them which repent : The Apostle , of making the vessell out of the masse , or lump , honourable or dishonourable . The Prophet speaks of the making or marring of one and the same vessell : the Apostle of divers vessels , and the making of one to honour , and another to dishonour . Lastly , the Apostle here speaks of the Lords purpose and work , without respect to good or evill done by the persons , and considering them as clay of the same lump : the Prophets , of Gods dealing with persons , according to the good or evill which hee finds in them , and so being divers , yea clean contrary lumps . And where they insinuate , that we hold the making of the clay to be in creation , which they affirm to be in vocation ; they speak untruely in both . No man ever held that God in , or by creation made any vessell to dishonour ; neither can they ascribe this , as they doe to vocation . Gods calling men is not to dishonour , but to honour onely . It is the divell , and his instruments , and not God , who call men to dishonour , which these men also proue against themselvs at large , in the two pages following ; and therin pull down with the one hand , what they haue built with the other , as children use to doe with their cob-castles . That which followeth , v. 24. 25 &c. is not to the thing in hand . The disputation about election ends , v. 23 , and that of vocation followeth : which latter is an effect of the former , declaring indeed the persons , but not confounding the things . And thus , if these men may be their own Iudges , and may haue the praise which their own mouth giues them , they haue very sufficiently explaned the ninth chapter to the Romans , and to full satisfaction of him that doubts , resolving him in every difficult place therof , as they blow the trumpet , or rather the bladder of their own praise : But if the Scriptures in their true sense , and scope may be judge , and giue sentence , they will be found neither to know them , nor the power of God over his creature . Which power , yet v. 22 , is declared not to be tyrannicall , but most just , never punishing , but after the induring of the vessels of wrath having sinned : as is his mercy also richly glorious in the salvation of the vessels of mercy , v. 23. ADVERSARIES . THE last place which they take upon them to answer is , Act. 13 , So many as were ordained to eternall life beleeved ; that is , say they , So many as beleev , and obey the truth , are ordained to eternall life . DEFENCE . A Strange perverting of the Scriptures , setting the head in the feets place , and the feet in the heads . For although the thing which they affirm , be in it selfe true , yet is it not the Evangelists meaning . Luke descends from the cause to the effect ; they crosly ascend from the effect to the cause . The Evangelists meaning is , that Pauls preaching in Antioch had a divers event with divers : of whom so many as were pre-appointed , or ordained to life beleeved , that is , of unbeleevers , which they were before , became beleevers in Christ : according to that Rom. 8. 30 , whom he predestinated them also he called : that is , he gaue them to beleev and repent . Their preordination or predestination to life therefore , went before their effectuall calling and beleeving , as the cause before the effect . Their assertion in the application of their Similitude , of a mercifull rich man , offering mony to so many as come , that they who proudly refuse the rich mans gift were ordained to haue it , as well as any that received it , is most erroneous , being applyed to the matter in hand , and strikes directly against the Text , which saith , that so many as were ordained to life did beleev ; that is , did come and receiv eternall life by beleeving in Christ. If all , or so many as were ordained received it , then they that received it not , were not ordained . Neither doth v. 46 ( as they affirm for a conclusion , that their end may answer their beginning ) testifie any such thing : but onely that they who thought themselvs unworthy of eternall life , had the word of God preached unto them : but that they were therfore ordained to eternall life , is not the testimony of the Text , but their unskilfull glosse . The Holy Ghost expresly opposeth unto them to whom Paul speaks , v. 46 , them that were ordained to life , v. 48. CHAP. III. Of falling away . ADVERSARIES . THE third Head questioned is , according to their order , whether a man may full from life eternalls but is more plainly and fully thus laid down ; Whether a man truely and effectually called , justified , and sanctified , may wholly fall away from the grace of Christ ? They hold the affirmatiue ; and that a man may thus fall away : though they set down their opinion both in unproper , and doubtfull terms , where they say , that the promise of Gods election is continuedupon continuance in the condition of faith , and obedience to Christs Gospell . DEFENCE . FIrst , the Scriptures speak not of the promise of Gods election , as they here doe again , and again . Election , or gods purpose of electing is before the world : the promise not , till men actually be . Gods purpose must needs be before his promise , for he but promiseth in time , what he purposed from eternity . If they had spoken of Gods purpose of , or according to election , it had been something : but what the promise of election means , I understand not ; nor , I suppose themselvs . All election is to somewhat ▪ and this , of which they speak , to salvation , the Kingdom of God , and eternall life ▪ In their meaning then , God promiseth to chuse to eternall life , and continueth to promise to chuse to eternall life , upon condition of continuance of the condition of election , faith and obedience ▪ Now a promise made upon a condition to goe before , is not to be performed till the condition be performed : and so , by their doctrine , God doth not elect any till they haue continued to the end , in faith and obedience , that is till they be dead . And so actuall and particular election , is not of men living , but dead : To which absurd assertion , these mens Masters , the Arminians are driven . It is true , that God neither purposeth nor promiseth to saue any , but such as persevere in faith and repentance unto the end : So is it also true , that this perseverance in grace depends upon election , which is , both to the end , and means , Christ Iesus , and perseverance in faith in him , and obedience unto him . ADVERSARIES . THeir Arguments are of two sorts : the former drawn from such Scriptures as teach ( as they say ) that the godly may fall away : the latter from such , as exhort and admonish godly men to keep them-from falling away . The latter of these two they prosequute ●n the first place , upon this ground ; that if there were not danger , and great need of warning , the Lord , who saith not in vain unto his people , Seek yee me , Esay 45. 19 , would not so oft move them to take heed , beware , and the like . DEFENCE . AS they are deceived , by the translation which they follow , Esay 45 , the Lord not speaking of his not saying in vain to his people ; Seek yee me : but of their not seeking him in vain ; seeing all his words tend to righteousnesse : So the ground which they lay is true in its selfe ; namely , that were there no danger any way , then it were in vain , to warn to take heed , which to affirm of God , derogates from his wisedom . We are therfore in the first place , by way of distinction , to consider a faithfull man , either in respect of himselfe , as sustaining himselfe : or in respect of the grace of Christ sustaining him . Considering him in himselfe , we willingly grant , that a faithfull man may as easily fall away , as did the Angels in heaven , and Adam in paradice , being left to themselvs : grace not being ( as is reason ) an inseparable property , but that which is separable from mans nature . But now considering the same faithfull person , as a living member of Christs body , receiving nourishment from him the head ; and given to Christ by the Father , that he might saue him ; as having the spirit of Christ dwelling in him ; and as kept by the power of God , through faith to salvation : in that regard we deny , that it can come to passe possibly , that such a one should wholly fall away from the grace received . And this divers consideration of one , and the same person , is founded in the Scriptures , and light of reason . The Apostle teacheth , that both he and all others are insufficient of themselvs , to think any thing , as of themselvs : but sufficient , as of God ; that the faithfull may be weak in themselvs , and haue God perfecting his strength in mans weakenesse ; that not a mans selfe , but the grace of God in him may labour aboundantly , that is , he by ●t , and not by his own strength . Thus ( to open the distinction yet full●er ) might Christs flesh haue seen corruption , considered in it selfe , as being made of the same mould with ours : but so could it not possibly in regard of Gods purpose , promise , and work of providence to the contrary . So considering his bones in themselvs , and their naturall strength , it was as possible they should haue been broken , by the souldiers , as the bones of the two theevs , crucified with him : but yet this was impossible in respect of Gods precedent word and prediction , Not a bone of him shall be broken ; and of his present work of most powerfull providence , according to his word . If now with this consideration , that a beleever may of himselfe fall away , we conjoyn this other , that the exhortations , and admonitions in the Scriptures , are means sanctified of God to keep , and preserv all his from such apostasie , how should it seem strange unto any , that God should infallibly obtain his own end ( the perseverance of his Saints ) by his own means , which these exhortations are ? Is it a good argument that God may fail of his end , because he useth effectuall means wherby to obtain it , as exhortations and warnings are , to perseverance ? Is it a good argument , that the conduit may want water , because a man ( skilfull in water-works ) layeth the conduit pipes with all diligence , and Art , between the Spring-head , and the Conduit ? Or that the childe ( whom his father holding him fast by the hand , in a slippery way , and bidding him look that he fall not ) can fall out of his fathers hand ? Nay , though left to himselfe , he may , yea cannot but fall ; yet considering his Fathers strength ( supposing him one that cannot fall himselfe ) wherof the childe is made partakers for his supportance , he cannot fall : Such a holding , and helping hand of God are these exhortations , made effectuall by his Spirit in the hearts of his children , true beleevers . Vnto whom , as the Lord suith , Seek yee my face ; so they answer , Thy face , Lord doe we seek : The Lord saith in his word , Take heed , Stand fast , Beware that ye fall not away , and the like . Vnto which their godly hearts answer , Lord wee doe take heed , doe beware , &c. For by these the servant of God is warned : They are as seed sown in good ground , which brings forth frui● with patience to the harvest . So as in truth , the clean contrary doctrine to these mens collection , is true ; that therfore the truely faithfull cannot fall away , because they ( they I say , being faithfull , obedient , and of honest hearts ) are by such exhortations , and admonitions , armed against such evill of apostacy . To conclude this point . The Lord Iesus giues his Apostles in charge to teach all Nations whatsoever he had commanded them : adding thereunto , the promise of his presence with them , if they so did , to the end of the world : against whom also a Woe was denounced if they did not preach the same Gospell . I would now know whether it could so come to passe , that these Apostles should not , and that willingly , preach this Gospell , and the truths thereof ? This to affirm were to blaspheme the holy Spirit of God , by which they were immediately and infallibly guided in their Ministery . Promises therfore and threatnings are not in vain for the provoking of men unto those duties , which by reason of the Spirits powerfull work in them , it is not possible but they should perform . ADVERSARIES . THE Scriptures brought by them for their Assertion , follow . The first is , Hebr. 11. 15. whence they gather , that as Esau lost his earthly inheritance , to which hee had right , so may the Saints loose their heavenly inheritance , which they haue right to . DEFENCE . THE Apostle doth not so conclude , but exhorts them onely to take head thereof : and of that matter we spake even now at large . Esau was a prophane person before he sold his birth-right , and never other ; No doubt but a prophane person , or hypocrite , nourishing in himselfe the root of bitternes , though living in the Church , may loose whatsoever right he had ; and of such the Apostle here speaks . If it be further objected , that Esau had right indeed to the birth-right ( by them unskilfully called the inheritance ) I answer , that he had never right to it spiritually , nor in Gods appoyntment , but onely in outward course , and in regard of men : and such a right to the heavenly inheritance may be , and is , by too many lost , as the Apostle here insinuates . Lastly , who sees not the difference between the inward grace of faith and holines in the heart of a true beleever ; and the carnall right to that which is common to good , and bad ? In Math. 5. 15. Christ sayth not as they accuse him , that salt may loose his savour : but if the salt loose his savour , as he sayth . If it be possible , let this cup passe from me : which yet ( all things considered ) could not be . Of which form of speech we haue lately treated , and shall more hereafter . I suppose it was never seen , that salt wanted saltnesse : and if it doe , how is it salt ? Besides , Christ calles not his Apostles salt , and light , in regard of the grace of faith in their hearts ; but of their preaching the Gospell , therewith to season and inlighten the world . 2. Pet. 2. 20. they pervert as the former places : making that absolute which is but conditionall , and with an If. They ( say they ) which are washed , may return with the sow , to wallow in the myre , and their latter end be worse then the beginning . The Apostle sayth , If after they be washed , &c. These forms of speech , whether in scripture , or other where , If this , then that , do not necessarily prove , that either this or that is so indeed ; but onely , that if this be so , then that also . Both this and that in themselves may be impossible , and yet the consequence good : as if I should say at mid-night , If it be day , the Sun is rising ; or at mid-day , If it be night , the Sun is set : so in the Scriptures , Luk. 19. 40. 1. Cor. 15. 13 , 14. 15. 16. &c. Gal. 1. 5. 10. and in infinite other places . It is sufficient for the truth of a conditionall proposition , that the latter part follow infallibly upon the former ; if it be ; but requires not that it should be . These men and others herein labour of the same mistaking with the Disciples , Ioh. 21. 22. 23. who upon Christs words to Peter touching ▪ Iohn , If I will that he tarry till ▪ I come , what is that to thee ? concluded , that Iohn should not dye , but should survive till the second comming of Christ ; which fancy also continued a long time in the mindes of many . But the Evangelist in the same place teacheth them that will learn , not to interprete conditionall speeches , as absolute ? Iesus sayd not unto him , he shall not dye ; but , if I will that he tarry till I come , or dye not . If it be further replyed , that the Apostle aimes at certaine particular persons , which denyed the Lord that bought them , whose pernicious wayes others followed , & unto whom it did happen according to the true proverb ▪ The dog is turned to his vomit again : which same persons Iude also chargeth to haue turned the grace of God into wantonnesse ; I willingly grant the thing so to haue been ; but deny the conditionall form of speech to proue it absolutely . And for the thing , I answer , that the Apostles there speak of mens being purged and washed , and the like , according to the outward profession onely , which they formerly made , and which the Church took knowledge of : and not according to the inward truth of the heart , which they knew not , but God alone . I add , to put the matter wholly out of question , that these Apostles thus speaking , doe in the same places both gather themselves by the event , and teach us that these persons , of whom they speak , were never truely and effectually sanctified , but onely in their own , and other mens opinion : as where Peter , v. 7. 8. 9. opposing righteous Lot to the wicked Sodomites , addeth , that as God delivered him , so fo he knoweth , that is , can and will deliver the godly out of temptations , and to reserve the unrighteous to the day of judgment for punishment . Likewise v. 21. The dog is turned to his own vomit again : and the sow that was washed , to her wallowing in the myre . They were alwayes then , in truth , but Dogs and Swine , though sometimes vomiting dogs , and washed on the out-side as swine are in the waters . And yet more plainly , of the same persons Iude sayth , v. 4. that they were ungodly men , and before of old ordained to that condemnation , and such as crept in unawares . They were at the best but hypocrites , in truth , and such as had crept in unawares , though seeming for a time to others ( and it may be to themselves also ) sanctified and purged , by their outward profession which profession formerly by them made , the Apostle upbraids them with , to their greater confusion . To Heb. 10. 29. the same answer serveth . The form of speech is but conditionall , If we sin wilfully , &c. v. 26. which proves , that if any so sin , then there remaines no more sacrifice for him : but proves not that any truly justified and sanctified , doth so sin . If it be asked , to what end then serves the fearfull denunciation used ? I answer , first , to keep the truely faithfull from so sinning : 2. to awaken even the secure , if not not desperate . 3. to paint out the fearfull state of incurable hypocrites and Apostates . And as the particular persons unto whom the Apostle there hath reference , could not by him certainly be discerned ever to haue been truely and inwardly sanctified ( for what man knoweth the things of a man , saue the spirit of man , which is in him ? ) so by their after course of Apostasie from Christ , he seemeth not obscur●ly to gather , and pronounce of them , that at their best they were but hollow-hearted ; as v. 38. 39. making an opposition between the truly just that liues ( and perseveres notwithstanding all temptations ) by faith ; and those with-drawers to perdition . So chapt . 6. speaking of the same , and like persons , If they fall away , v. 6. he insinuates against them , v. 8. that they were never other then thorny earth , opposed to good earth , bringing forth hearbs meet for him that dresseth it . As also , v. 9. 10. he makes it a poynt of Gods righteousnes not to forget the work and labour of loue of the truely faithfull , or beloved ; viz. so as to suffer them to fall away from the things which accompany saluation . With which accords that else-where , Faithfull is he that calleth you , which will also doe it ; that is , will preserv the truely faithfull blamelesse unto the comming of the Lord Iesus Christ : as doth that also in the parable , where onely the seed sown in the stony , or thorny ground withered , and was choked before the harvest ; but not any one corn sown in good ground . To 1. Tim. 1. 19. where it is sayd , that some , as Hymenaeus and Alexander by name , haue put away a good conscience , and made shipwrack of faith , I answer , ( letting passe other things ) that Paul speaks no more of them then he knowes : and so not knowing their heart , and inward man , ( which onely God doth ) he speaks of their faith , and good conscience , not as considered in their hearts , which he knew not ; but in outward profession , whereof he had taken knowledge . The same answer serveth to 1. Tim. 5. 12. if by the first faith there be not meant these womens former promise of serving the Church , in the widowes or Deaconesses office ; and then it is nothing to the matter in hand . It is not sayd Exod. 32. 32. 33. in the text , but in their glosse , that some written in the book of life may be blotted out , Moses onely desires-there , that if God would not pardon his peoples sin , and bring them into Canaan , he would blot him out of his book . But the Lord answers him in the same place , that that cannot be , but that he that sins against him , him he will blot out . Is it to be conceived , that Moses for the sin of others ; whereof he was altogether innocent , yea for his holy zeale and loue towards Gods people , should be blotted out of the book of life ? If you say , that yet some ( to wit sinning ) may be blotted out , I grant it in Gods sense , but not in theirs . For first , this is meant of temporary , and not of eternall life , of the blotting their name from vnder heaven ; of the destroying them , and making of Moses a nation greater then they . Of that of which God is sayd to repent upon Moses his prayer , v. 14. which was onely in regard of their temporall state and life . 2. It is not onely vanity , but impiety also to affirm that these persons were ever truely justified and sanctified . Not onely Moses and Aaron , but God himselfe upon this very occasion testifies the contrary , v. 9. 22. Deut. 9. 7. 13. To Psal. 69. 29. I answer , that David means ▪ no more , then that his adversaries should no longer be continued in the Church and fellowship of Gods people , the latter part of the verse expounding the former , Let them not be written with the righteous : which the Prophet Ezech●el termes , not being vvritten in the vvriting of the house of Israel . And seeing David here speaks of certain particular persons his adversaries , let these men shew the markes by which he knew certainly that they were once truely justified and sanctified , or by which they know them so to have been . They take that for granted , in which the maine question lyeth ; and laying such foundations , what can their building bee ? As the Black-more changeth not his skin ; so neither doe they their bold manner , in putting their glosse for the Scripture : as appeares in the next place cited by them , Rev. 3. 5. Christ there teacheth , that some ( namely they that over-come ) shall not haue their name blotted out of the book of life . They bring him in saying , that some vvritten in the book of life may be put out . God blots not out their name that overcome : and if any overcome not in the spirituall warfare , it shewes his name was never written there . All that dwell on the earth shall vvorship the beast , vvhose names are not vvritten in the book of life of the lamb . On the contrary , the Saints indeed , and elect , get victory over the beast , by faith and patience . That by the Talents given to the servants , Math. 25 , is meant the graces of justification and sanctification ; and not the gifts of the Spirit given for the edification of the Church , as 1. Cor. 12. 7. & Eph. 4. 8. is their presumption . Iustification & sanctification make men the servants of Christ at first these talents were given to them that were servants already : and that according to their severall ability for their speciall places . Besides , the taking away of the talent here spoken of , is not in this life , but at the day of judgment : and therefore is unskilfully brought for their purpose . Touching Pauls affirming that the Saints at Rome were justified by faith , Rom. 5 , and yet threatning , that if they continued not in the bounty of God , they should be cut off , ch . 11. 21. I answer , as before ; first , that the threatning is conditionall , as Gal 1. 8 , If we , &c. Was it possible that Paul should preach any other Gospell ? Or were he an Angell from heaven , or of God that should so doe ? I suppose no , ch . 4. 14. But an Angell from hell rather , and of the divell . The question is not whether if any should not abide in the bounty of God , they were to be cut off or no ? But whether any with whom hee hath dealt so bounteously , as indeed to justifie and sanctifie them , haue not also a promise , by his power , to be kept in that his bounty , by the means which he hath appointed ? Secondly , Paul pronounceth those Romans justified , not from the judgement of certainty , but of charity . Of whom as some were undoubtedly sincere , whom God did by this , and the like warnings , preserv and keep in his grace : so for the hypocrites mingled amongst them , it was but that which we say , if in their time they were broken off from that which formerly they seemed to others by their profession ( and it may be to themselvs also ) to haue had . And indeed , this very place , if it be well minded , ministers full answer to the most of their Arguments . This warning ( though immediately given to the Romans ) concerns all Christians as well as them : And being founded upon an example of the Lords dealing with the Iews , must be expounded , and applyed accordingly . Who then were these exemplary Iews , formerly cut off by the Lord from the oliue tree ? Were they such as had once truely beleeved , but had after made defection ? I suppose not even in these mens judgment ; but such as occupying a place in the Church , yet were , in truth , faithlesse hypocrites , and as chaff in the Lords flore , which the Son of man comming with his fan in his hand purged out . And in these we may see , what kind of branches they are , which in time come actually and visibly to bee broken off from the Oliue . The instances following of Elies house loosing the Priesthood , Saul the Kingdom of Israel , and the Israelites Canaan , serv onely to fill up room . That Priesthood , Kingdom , and Canaan , were not the graces of faith , and sanctification in the heart : nor the losse of them sin , but punishments onely . Onely the last place Math. 18. 32 , where debt forgiven is , as they say recalled , were something to the purpose , if the drift of the parable were to shew , that God indeed forgivs sins , and after unforgives them : which were lightnesse unbecomming any graue , and honest man. But the scope of the parable being no more , then that we ought to forgiue such as offend us , and that otherwise God will not forgiue us : to draw more from it , is to forget that it is a parable , and to take the high way to to most grievous errour . Besides , there is in this parable no colour for falling away from grace , and true godlinesse , formerly had ; but onely ( even their exposition being admitted ) that a man may haue his sins pardoned , who yet wants all brotherly loue and goodnesse , which the Scriptures every where deny , Math. 6. 14. 15 , Mark. 11. 24. 25 , 1 Ioh. 3. 14. 15 , Rom. 8. 1 , Ps. 32. 1. 2. Thirdly , by these grounds , no man can certainly know , that his sins are indeed pardoned , whilst he liues in the world , because he may still fall away , and so haue his pardon recalled , though sealed up unto him by the very spirit of God it selfe . And so all our faith must be but adventure whilst we liue in the world , whether our sins past be in truth pardoned , or no ; contrary to the Scriptures . Lastly , this impeacheth both the justice of God , and his truth . His justice in making him require double satisfaction for the same debt ; first , of his Son , even the price of his bloud , and the same also by faith , applyed to the person that hath sinned and beleeveth ; and after of the person himselfe . Of his truth , and that both of his word absolutely promising forgiuenesse of sins to him that beleeveth , and also of his spirit , by which he seals up the same unto their hearts . Their second and third reason , taken from the fall and sin of Adam , and all mens falling , and sinning in and by him , are wholly besides the question : which is onely of falling from the grace of God in Christ ▪ from election in him , from the loue of God towards us , when we were enemies , from mercy which presupposeth sin , and misery , and is properly Evangelicall . God gaue Adam his portion in grace by creation , and left it in his own keeping , which hee soon mispent : but hath dealt more mercifully with us in making his Son our feof●er in trust , that he as our head , might keep and improue the grace of God belonging to us , as is meet for us : lest we having ●ll at once , and that same left in our own hands , should mispend all , as Adam did . To that which they alledge from Eph. 1. 4 , compared with Rev. 2. 4. 5 , I answer , first that Paul stiles those Ephesians elect onely as he knew them so to be ; which was by outward appearance of holinesse . Secondly , that the leaving of their first loue was not a total falling from grace , but onely a decaying of their former zeal . Thirdly , the threatning of the Candlesticks removing , was to the truely called , an effectuall means of drawing them to repentance . When these men can make it appear , that any one of the truely elect and sanctified Ephesians did wholly despise this and the like means of their bettering , I will then grant their proof strong . It may as well be concluded , that therefore the fire goes out , because it hath good and fresh fuell put unto it , and is diligently blown . For these exhortations and admonitions are as fuell and blowing to preserv from going out , the spark , and fire of grace in the hearts of beleevers . That onely he that continues to the end , and overcomes shall be saved ; and that the promise of acceptance , and salvation ( by them miscalled the promise of election ) is no otherwise intended to us , then upon our abiding in the faith , and obedience of Christ. Wee beleev and confesse with them , according to the Scriptures : but withall are taught , and beleev according to the same Scriptures , that God keeps all his holy ones unto the end , and giues them to overcome ; that he puts his fear in their heart , that they shall not depart from him ; that the seed sown in good ground shall neither wither by persecution , nor be choaked by cares of the world , or deceitfulnesse of riches , or otherwise ; but shall grow up to the harvest ; that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church , or any one member thereof , built upon the rock of Peters confession ; that God is faithfull , who with the temptation will giue a way to escape , for all his ; that they are kept by the power of God , through faith to salvation ; and that being born of God , they doe not sin nor can ( to wit , as the children of the devill doe ) because his seed remaineth in them . Their objections following , that by our doctrine men need not fear falling into condemnation , though they fall into notorious sin , nor repent having committed such sins ; are of no weight : seeing God , though he promise salvation to the truely called , certainly , yet he neither promiseth it , neither are they to beleev it immediately ; but by means of fearing to sin , and of repentance when sin is committed , which hee also promiseth to work , and put in their heart that they shall not depart from him . The Lord prom●sed by the Prophet Ieremy that after 70 years of the Iews captivity accomplished at Babylon , he would visit them , and cause them to return to Ierusalem . And whereas it might be objected against the certainty of this promise and event : What ? Shall they return though they repent not , nor seek the Lord , but remain rebellious , as they haue been , and their fore-fathers before them ? He answers , that then they shall call upon God , and pray unto him , and seek unto him ; and he will hearken unto them , be found of them , and return their captivity . He promiseth both the end and the means ; and hee that promiseth is faithfull in performing , and providing for both temporall and eternall deliverance , and the meanes thereof . Their Argument taken from exhortations , and admonitions in the Scriptures , that we receiv not the grace of God in vain , 2 Cor. 6. 1 , and the like , hath formerly been fully answered . They are not in vain , either in respect of elect or reprobate : neither yet will we own their absurd answer here fathered upon us , that the whole Scriptures are given to keep both elect and reprobate from falling into grosse sins ; yet that neither the elect can be damned by transgressing them , nor the reprobate saved by observing them . The Scriptures haue divers ends ; and amongst others , are given to keep all , not onely from grosse , but from all sins . Neither doe we affirm , that the elect cannot be damned by transgressing them ; or that the reprobate cannot be saved by observing them , as they like deceitfull proctors , plead for us , or rather for their own advantage . But this we say , that the elect and truely sanctified are so kept by the power of God in his feare , that they never transgresse as the wicked do ; nor can , because his seed remaineth in them : that they continually renue their repentance ; particular , for sins known , into which through infirmity they fall ; and generall , for sinns unknown , as David did ; and that even by means of those exhortations and admonitions ; which God opens their hearts to attend unto , and giues increase accordingly . And the contrary , the reprobates , being left to themselvs of God , haue by their own and satans malice , their eyes so blinded , and hearts hardened , as though those means of exhortation come unto them , they either understand them not , or beleev them not , or despise them ; but never observ or obey them aright . Their curses of the doctrine in this point received in all Reformed Churches , as Atheisticall and damnable ; and their blessing themselvs from it , is here as every where , the fruit of that wilde zeale , wherewith their ignorant hearts are possessed . Their answers follow to the Scriptures brought against them . The first is , Math. 24. 24. If it were possible they ( the false Teachers ) should deceiv the very elect . Whence we conclude ( as they say ) that it is not possible the elect should perish . And here first they shew , who are the elect of God ; noting indeed the persons , but perverting the order of grace . If in saying , as they doe , that the elect of God , are those that receiv and obey the truth of Christ , and abide in him unto the death , they meant , that such as are chosen of God in his decree before the world , and actually and effectually , chosen and called in time by the Word and Spirit , to beleev and obey , did so abide to the death , it were but the truth , which the Scriptures teach and we professe : But intending , as they doe , that men haue onely the promise of actuall and particular election till then , but are not absolutely elected ; and that absolute election follows this abiding in Christ till death ; they are like the foolish builder , which would lay the foundation upon the roofe of the house . By their comment upon Christs words , men should be in danger to be seduced by false Prophets , when they haue abiden in Christ unto death ; for till then they will haue none elect : and the elect are here said to be in danger to be seduced . That which they gather from the manifold warnings in the Scriptures to the elect , that none deceiv them &c. is true ; namely that the elect may fall from their election ( or rather from the grace received ) if they take not heed . But they should withall proue , that God doth ever , so far leav and forsake any truely justified , and sanctified in Christ , as that they take no heed at all , as they ought . It is certain , that if the very elect Angels in heaven , or Christ Iesus upon earth ▪ had taken no heed to Gods commandements , they could not haue observed them . That which is added , that many fall away , not by being deceived ▪ but willingly forsaking the truth : and again , that many fall away willingly , not being deceived , is neither pertinent , seeing the place in question speaks onely of such as are deceived : nor true , seeing a man cannot will any evill , but under a shew and appearance of good , so presented to the will , by a deceived , and e●●ing understanding . And so the Scriptures every where ascribe all manner of defection from God , and his holy commandements , to errour , either in the generall ground , or particular case . The next place is Ioh. 10. 27. 28 , My sheep hear my voyce , and they know me , and follow me , and I giue unto them eternall life , and they shall never perish , neither shall any take them out of mine hand . My Father which hath given them me , is greater then all , and no man is able to pluck them out of my Fathers hand . They here conceiv the purpose of Christ to be , to confirm his sheep , so long as they continue his sheep , &c. But herein they draw violently Christs purpose to their own . For Christ , as may be seen , by comparing herewith v. 16. 26. 27 , is to shew how it came to passe , that some of his hearers beleeved and obeyed his voyce , and some not . Many of the Iews beleeved not , because they were not his sheep : some did , being his sheep , to wit , by destination of God. Christ saith not , that they are not his sheep , because they beleev not ; but that they beleev not , because they are not his sheep ; that is , not being of the elect of God , they are left to their own impenitent , and unbeleeving heart , which they also willingly harden against Christs voyce . Where v. 16 , he saith , Other sheep I haue which are not of this fold , whom also I must bring &c , hee means the elect amongst the Heathens destinated to that one Sheep-fold , under him that one Shepheard , and by his voyce to be brought therto . This is yet more plain v. 15 , where he saith , I giue my life for my sheep . Christ dyed for the ungodly , Rom. 5. 6. 8. By his sheep , therfore in this place , are meant the elect from eternity ▪ for whom he dyed : the fruit of which election of God , and death of Christ , sheweth forth it selfe in their timeous faith and obedience . Further , note we for the thing in hand , that Christ giues unto his sheep , that hears his voyce and obey him , eternall life : as elsewhere also he saith , He that beleeveth on the Son hath everlasting life . If this life which they haue given them , and haue ( in the beginnings of it ) even in this life , be eternall and everlasting ; how can it be broken off afterwards ? Or if it can be interrupted and broken off , how is it everlasting and eternall ? Lastly , if none be able to pluck Christs sheep out of his , and his Fathers hand : then no sinfull person , or temptation , no malice of Satan can turn them from God : for if they can , then they can pluck them out of Gods hand . Is not the destroying and corrupting of mens faith and obedience , the plucking them out of the hand of God ? V. 12 , the same word is used , the wolfe catcheth and scattreth the sheep , that is , corrupteth them , as Math. 7. 10 , Act. 20. 29 , where the same word is used also . As they are elsewhere too prodigall of Christs benefits to all the goats in the world , so are they here too niggardly of them to his own sheep : Although in truth they grant , though unawares , as much as we plead for , in saying , that those sheep , so long as they continue his sheep , haue spirituall peace and safety &c. Spirituall peace and safety is against all assaults of all spirituall enemies , labouring to subvert the spirituall state of Gods people . To the Scriptures here alledged by them for their purpose , the answers formerly given touching conditional threatnings , and Gods people in appearance , must be applyed . Of the former of the two Scriptures following , which is Ioh. 13. 1 , Whom he loveth , he loveth to the end , they speak as the thing is , of Gods loue : but as loath to be too much beholden to him for it , and desirous Pharisaically to justifie themselvs , they pull down what they formerly built , in saying , that the question is not of Gods and Christs loue unto his , but of the continuance of our loue unto him : wherein they both gainsay themselvs in this whole Treatise , and the Scriptures throughout . They put the question themselvs of Gods election , and of the promise of election . And is election , and the promise of election a work of our loue to God , or of Gods to us ? The Scriptures also ascribe the whole work of our salvation , as election , redemption by the bloud of Christ , vocation , revelation of heavenly things , justification , sanctification , adoption , faith , repentance , and the giving of the Spirit , issue out of temptations , and continuing blamelesse to the comming of the Lord , unto the good pleasure and loue of God alone . It is true , that we must also loue God , as they say : But we must know ▪ withall , that this our loue of God depends upon his loue of us first , and the same shead abroad into our hearts by his Spirit , which giues testimony therof to our spirits : which , as it were , forceth loue again from us to God , and the continuance of it the continuance of our loue ; according to that of the Apostle , The loue of Christ constraineth us . For as the beams of the Sun shed into the bosome of the earth first heat it , and so cause it to reflect heat again towards heaven : so by the loue of God shead into our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given us , our hearts are most effectually drawn , and perswaded to loue God againe , and men for , and according to him . Which I further also manifest thus . Our loue , whether to God or man , ariseth from faith unfeyned . Faith stands in the assured perswasion of the heart , by the Holy Ghost , of Gods loue to us : Wherupon I conclude , that our salvation depending immediately upon our faith , loue , and obedience , as conditions requisite by Gods ordination , and they upon Gods loue ( and the same known ) to us , and so the continuance of them upon the continuance of it ; the question is properly , and principally of the loue of God to us , and the unchangeablenesse therof . For Rom. 11. 29 , they dream waking , that the meaning is that God will never repent of saving all persons at all times , in all places , that seek salvation by faith in Christ , and continue therin . If this were all , what needed the Apostle v. 33 , to break out into that admiration of the riches of the wisedom , and knowledge of God , and of the unsearchablenes of his judgments ? What strange thing is it , that God should not repent of so gracious a purpose and promise , as is that of saving such as beleev in his Sonne . Secondly , it is more then evident , that he speake not here of saving all at all times , but of the saving of some at sometimes ; namely , of the Israelites in their time , and of the Gentiles in theirs . Thirdly , the Apostle speaks not of saving them that beleev , but of giving the election to obtain mercy , to beleev . Lastly , the words are a reason of that which goes before , the Israelites touching election , are beloved for the Fathers sake , v. 28. For , or because the gifts and calling of God are without repentance ; as if he should haue said : though for the present , the body of the Israelites be enemies for the Gospell , that is , in not beleeving it , till the fulnesse of the Gentiles be come in ; yet the election , such as are that Israel , according to election , and Gods people which he foreknew , v. 2 , them he loues in his decree unchangeably , for their father , Abraham , Isaak , and Iakobs sake , and without repentance ; and so will in their time make them actually partakers of his most gracious gift and calling . They here add certain Scriptures ( and may doe many moe ) proving that God denies the effect to conditionall promises , men breaking the conditions first : But as the Scriptures cited by them , speak not all of salvation in Christ ; so neither doe any other shew , that God ever alters purpose , or promise of saving any , whom he once loved in Christ , whether in decree , or application of loue . The last place which they labor to elude is , 1 Ioh. 2. 19. They went out of us , but they were not of us : for if they had been of us , they would , no doubt , haue continued with us , but they went out , that they might be manifest , that they were not all of us . And here , in stead of answering directly to the place , they make out-leaps , as their manner is : making us to affirm that God hath predestinated some persons to salvation , and some to damnation without any condition : and that these persons ( the elect ) making never so great shew of wickedness , and walking in the wayes of Belial , are still elect , and can by no means fall out of their election : the other persons having never so many testimonies of godl●nesse , and walking in the Church of Christ , yet can never but be reprobates , and if ever they fall away from the Church , or truth , that they were never truely of it . We affirm , that God predestinates none to salvation but with condition of the death of Christ , and the persons ( coming to years of discretion ) faith , and repentance , and continuance therin to the end , to goe before that their salvation : nor to damnation , but with condition of sin , and impenitency therein to goe before that their damnation . But our Adversaries being bold and presumptuous , speak evill of the things which they neither know , nor are walling to understand . Onely , these two things we further hold in this case . First , that the former conditions ( Christ , and faith in him ) are Gods free gifts also , infallibly and effectually obtained by the former persons : the latter condition ( impenitency in sin ) the certain effect of Satans malice , and their own corruption , being left of God thereunto . The second is , that other reason , why God hath , of two alike corrupt in themselvs , preordained the former to salvation , by the former means ; and the latter to condemnation , by the latter ; the Scriptures doe not acquaint us with then the meer pleasure of him , who hath mercy on whom he will haue mercy , and whom he will , hee hardneth : and who hath loved Iakob , and hated Esau , to wit , in decree , the children not bing yet born , neither having done either good or evill . Secondly , we say not that the elect so remain , though walking in the wayes of Belial ; but deny , that ever they so walk after their effectual calling , though through the remainders of corruption ( in some more strong then in others ) they haue not onely their common slidings , but often their greater fals , from which they recover themselvs by repentance : the spirit alwaies lusting against the flesh , and they in regard of the Law of their minde , and spirituall man , not allowing , but hating the evill , which through the sin dwelling in them , they doe . Neither , on the other side , doe the Reprobates ever shew any one ( much lesse many ) true testimonies of godlinesse ; though many seeming such oftentimes , both in their own judgments of themselvs , and other mens of them . He that should challenge a man for affirming , that it could not but be light at mid-day , nor but be dark at midnight , in comparison ; that he affirmed , that it could not but be light at noon , though the Sun should not be up : nor but be dark at midnight , though the Sun were not set ; should but use slaunderous cavillation : even such , and no better , is their collection upon our assertion . Where they add , that as all mens estates are one by creation , and one by transgression , all being dead in sins ; and that , as all are shut up in unbeliefe , so he hath mercy on all , to wit , every particular person alike , they mis-interpret the Scripture , as hath been formerly shewed ; mistake the proportion of nature ( whether by creation , or corruption ) with that of meer grace ; and are most impious against Gods mercy , which they make all one towards Pharaoh and Moses ; Herod and Paul : Besides , it should follow hereupon , that God hath mercy actually on all and every person in the world , in taking away their sinnes , and saving them ; for the Apostle whose words they cite , speaks expresly of such an all as obtain mercy that way . With like truth do they after affirm , from Math. 13 , that the sower soweth the seed of salvation upon all . It cannot with modesty be denyed , but there are , and haue been many millions , unto whom the Gospell ( the onely seed of salvation ) was never preached . And as they begin , so goe they on with this parable ; as being of them ; in whose mouth a parable is like the legs of the lame that are lifted up , and like a thorn that goes up into the hand of a drunkard . As first , where by the good seed they understand the seed of salvation , or Gospell , and by tares , false doctrines : as if they know the minde of our Saviour , better then he himselfe : who expresly teacheth , that the good seed are the children of the Kingdom ( so called , because they are the heyres of their Fathers Kingdom ) in which the righteous are to shine forth as the Sun , v. 43 , and the tares the children of the wicked one , which doe iniquity , are to be gathered by the Angels in the end of the world , and cast into the furnace of fire , &c. And if the good seed were the Gospell , and the tares false doctrines , as they ( transforming persons into things ) would make them ; yet is it untruely affirmed by them , that the persons of them who receiv the good seed were no better then the other , nor the persons of them who receiv the tares any worse then the other . That both are alike , to wit , dead in sin , when God offereth the Gospel , we willingly grant , and are glad to hear them confess : but to say they are both alike , when the one receivs the Gospell , and the other refuseth it , and receivs the tares contrary unto it , is to say that the good ground , and the bad , are both alike . For what makes them that are alike , when the Gospel comes alike unto them , not to remain alike stil ? And what is the reason why the one receivs it , and not the other ? They say , because the goodnesse of the Sower first sowed it , and therfore he hath cause to praise him onely . But , say I , this goodnesse is alike to both the two in sowing , or offering the Gospels seed : Whereupon it must follow , that he who receivs this good seed , hath no more cause to praise God the Sower , then he that receivs it not : for it is sowen alike on both , in regard of outward offer ; but for the ones receiving of it , rather then the other , he hath cause to thank himselfe alone , and his own freewill . And indeed this is the mark at which all those Adversaries arrows are shot . But the Scriptures teach us a further thing , then these ungratefull persons will acknowledge ; which is , that besides , and aboue the offer common to both , God giues the encrease to some ( without which , all preaching is nothing : ) even by opening of the heart to attend unto it , as he did the heart of Lydia . And as persons receiv the word of God into their hearts by his opening them first , so in that his gracious work in them , hee makes them which were before alike , in spirituall consideration , to become unlike , and better then other ; and so more beloved then others for the godly qualities , as they call them , which he hath wrought in them . Neither doth the Lord hate onely the works of wicked men , as they say ; but also the workers of iniquity : not with a passion of the mind , as hatred is in man , but with a holy will to punish the violation of his righteous Law. And though with a generall loue of the Creator to the creature , he alwaies , after a sort , loue the persons of men , as being his generation , yet he loues , ( as is meet ) the honour of his holinesse , more then the happinesse of his creature , having violated and prophaned it without repentance . They further bewray their ignorance , where they think to mend the matter , in saying , that God hates the persons , as weapons and instruments of those wicked qualities . Where hath God ever so spoken , or any other man before them ? The godly qualities , or graces of knowledge , faith , loue , patience , and the like , are the spirituall armour and weapons of godly men ; the members also of men are called the weapons of righteousnesse , or unrighteousnes , for that with them they practise ▪ & perform the works thereof : But to say , the persons are weapons and instruments of the qualities , is to put the person in the hand of the weapon to be used by it ; wheras on the contrary , all know , that the weapon and instrument is in the hand of the person , and to be used and exercised by him . They here , in desiring the Reader well to observ what they haue said , as being a most blessed truth , are loath that their nakednesse should not be seen in their spirituall drunkennesse . ADVERSARIES . NOW for the words of the Apostle , to which they return after so long wandring ; their comment is , They went out from us , &c. that is , say they , Those lying spirits , those persons who had once the spirit of truth in them , went out from the Apostles and other Saints . And again , those lying spirits and Antichrists in mens persons , went out &c. and were never of the truth : the summe of all being , that lying spirits , and Antichrists in mens persons , went out of the truth . DEFENCE . A Riddle , better fitting H. N. then the professours of the truth in simplicity . It behoues us therefore a little to insist upon the Text , opening it according to the Apostles meaning , and ours with him ; and first proving against them , that by those that went out , are not meant the lying spirits in the persons , but the persons themselues . And first , these words , They went out from us , or better , from out of us , shew , that those out-goers were formerly of them in a respect ; else how could they haue gone out from them ? But lying spirits were never of the Apostles and Saints ; but the persons sometimes were . Secondly , hee saith not , as they corrupt the Text , If they had been of the truth , but of us ; nor they would hane continued with it , but with us , nor , but they are not of it , but they were not of us : all carrying it to persons so , and so qualified . Thirdly , Is it to be conceived , that the Apostle would complain ( as heere he doth ) that lying spirits did not continue with the Churches ? Fourthly , in saying , They went out of us , that it might be manifest that they were not all of us , he shews that by their out-leaps , something was manifested which was hid before . But it was plain before , to the Apostles and Saints , that lying spirits were not of the truth . He speaks therefore of the persons of hypocrites , whom by this their professed defection , God discovered . Fithly , in saying , they were not all of us , he insinuates that some of them were ; What ? some lying spirits of the Spirit of truth ? No , but that not all the persons that formerly professed the truth with them , were true members of Christs body , which they were . Lastly , v. 20 , He makes an opposition between them of whom hee writes , and to whom . But yee What ? yee spirits , and so v. 28 , little children , that is , little spirits . All may see with what spirit these men are led . He then speaks of the going out of persons , not of spirits , as they mean ; but being indeed Antichrists , as v. 18 , in regard of their spirits , and doctrines , for which they pretended the spirit of Christ. That which they add of the spirit of Hymeneus , together with his person , being in fellowship with Paul , is like the rest . By his Spirit it seems they mean his faith , in saying faithfull Hymeneus was of the truth ; erroneous Hymeneus was never of it . Hath the faith of a person fellowship with the Saints ? Or did Hymeneus his faith sometimes hold faith and a good conscience , and after put them away ? Or are not these things plainly spoken of the person of men ? Paul speaking that of Hymeneus , and others , which hee knew in regard of outward appearance , and not that which he knew not of , the inward truth in the heart . The meaning of Iohn is plain enough , that these Antichrists went out of the Church , not by making any seperation , or schism from it , as some thinke ( for they still continued in the outward fellowship , preaching , and prophesying and deceiving ; ) but in it , by heresie and prophanenesse , contrary to that outward profession of faith , and holinesse , which they had formerly made : by which their defection they shewed , that they were never truely regenerate , and inwardly and indeed living members of the body : but having been hypocrites , at their best , God so ordered , that they should hereby discover themselvs . For had they been indeed of the number of the faithfull , they had so continued to the end . Which truth this Apostle confirms further , ch . 3 , very evidently , saying ; whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin : For his , that is , Gods seed remaineth in him , and he cannot sin , because he is born of God. He doth not say , as some would haue him , he cannot sin , or commit sin , that is , giue himselfe to sin , as the wicked doe , whilst the seed of God remains in him , or whilst hee is born of God ; but for , or because , this seed of the new birth remaineth in him . One observation I will here annex , and so conclude this Head. It cannot be , saith Christ , but offences will come . And of all offences , none is greater , and which more wounds the tender heart of a weak Christian , then when he sees such , as by their former profession and appearances , haue purchased to themselvs the opinion of piety and godlinesse , to apostate , and fall away from that their former profession , either to grosse errour , or prophanenesse . This occasions him to suspect ( Satan by suggestions of unbelief , furthering him herein ) that there is not in the course of Christianity , that power of grace , stablenesse , and true comfort , which it promiseth . This stone of offence , which Satans malice casts in the way , Gods spirit removeth , in providing , that where there is in the Scriptures , either mention , or insinuation of mans falling away from the grace of God , there is withall commonly an item given in the same place , that such persons were never effectually sanctified , but hypocrites , at their best , whatsoever they seemed either to others , or to themselvs . Thus , where some at the first , receiving the word with joy , are after when tribulation ▪ or persecution ariseth ▪ offended ; others haue made some growth , yet become unfruitfull by the cares of the world and deceitfulnesse of riches : the Lord would haue us take knowledg , that such were never better then stony and thorny ground . Thus , that Iudas being lost , was none of them whom the Father had given unto Christ , but a child of perdition . Thus where , Israel did not obtain that which it sought for , but was broken off , yet that the election obtained it : the gifts and calling of God being without repentance . Thus , that they , which fall , are such as think ( that is presume , that ) they stand , rather then ever doe so indeed . Thus , that though some come to err concerning the truth formerly professed by them ▪ yet the foundation of God stands steady , having this soul , The Lord knoweth who are his . Thus , that if some inlightned , and tasting of the heavenly gifts &c. fall away , it is they that are dull of hearing , like the earth , that beareth but thorns , and bryars , notwithstanding the rayns falling upon it . Thus , that false Teachers , and such as follow their pernicious wayes , were at first and best , but men creeping in unawares . Lastly , that such as went out of the fellowship of the Apostles and Churches , in the outward profession of faith , and holinesse , were never truely , and inwardly of them , as was made manifest in due time . CHAP. IIII. Of Freewill . AFTER a lowd blast in the beginning , as formerly , of their full and sufficient dealing in the former point , our Adversaries begin this with a false , and foul accusation . ADVERSARIES . THE Calvinists hold , that wicked men are compelled to sinn by Gods power ; and again , that men are compelled by the power , force and compulsion of Gods predestination to all wicked , and cruell crymes . Against which they alleag out of Bastingius , and Thes. Genev. that Man by evill was spoyled not of his will , but of the soundnesse of his will. Therfore that which in nature was good , in quality became evill : and that , as Bernard teacheth , there is in us all power to will , but to will well , we had need to profit better ; to will evill we are able already by reason of our fall : as also , that there remains freedom in all good , naturall , civill , morall , and judiciall things , but not in spirituall . These things , they say , if we wil stand to , they require no more . DEFENCE . BOth we will stand to them , and they must fall by them , as they might evidently see , if they considered , that all our question is about freedom of will in spirituall things ; which alone we deny . The ground of their errour here is , that they unskilfully confound necessity & compulsion ; and conceiv not how a thing , both free and casuall in it selfe , may be the over-ruling hand of Gods providence be determined necessarily this way , or that . The difference between necessity and compulsion I haue formerly both proved and opened at large : shewing how mans freewill in chusing that which is evill , and Gods powerfull hand in governing him in that his choise , according to his wise counsell , to his holy ends , may well stand together . And for that which is good , God works it by inclination , by his Word and Spirit ; which inclination cannot be compulsion , seeing compulsion and violence is onely against the inclination of the thing , and not the inclining of it . God herein first takes away the former corrupt inclination , that ●t reign not , which is the coard wherewith a man is tyed , as they speak , and then giues a new inclination contrary to the former , not haleing up a man by main force , as they mishape a similitude for us , but giving inward will and strength of grace for the man to raise up himselfe by . And if all kinde of necessity abolish all kind of freedom , then in truth a man doth nothing freely ; for whatsoever he doth , he doth it necessarily , when he doth it . They doe here in vain heap up Scriptures like medicines upon a sound stomack , to prove that election , and choyce cannot be but in , or rather with liberty . We acknowledg that whatsoever good or evill a man doth outwardly , or inwardly , where the will comes to work ( for there may be acts of the understanding , and motions of the affections before and without the wills working ) he useth liberty and freedom in chusing , or refusing : that is , he doth it not by any violence or compulsion , but from the inward principles of his mind ; the understanding directing , and the will consenting ; though yet the wicked , being left of God , cannot but doe wickedly , any more then the Aethiopian can change his skin , or the Leopard his spots : nor the godly but doe godlily , by the grace of God effectually inclining him thereunto . Neither doth our affirmation make voyd , or unmoveing the threatnings of God ; but makes both threatnings , and promises , and precepts , and all , most effectuall ; God by the inward work of his spirit giving an encrease to the outward preaching ; and opening the heart to receaue the same . One man can move another by outward motives , words , and the like . Will these men affoord God no more , or other work ? Will they deny any inward work of Gods spirit at all , above the words work , though in , and by it ? What mean then the holy Scriptures speaking so frequently of this Spirits work in men , with means , without means ; for ordinary , and extraordinary operations , both gifts , and graces ? Or if there be such a spirit of God dwelling , and working in men , why doe they deny unto it , a prevailing power , wheresoever it pleaseth God to bestow it ? And for those that cannot repent , as they plead for some ; God , and their own consciences will plead against them , that they will not repent : and so are not tyed with a coard by others , and violently with-held , as they plead for them , but doe willingly cast , and keep the coards of iniquity , and rebellion upon themselvs . We acknowledg also ( and they therefore prove in vain ) that to whomsoever the word comes , them God would have gathered unto him , hearken unto his voyce , repent that they might live and not dy , to wit , in that degeee of willing , which stands in commanding those things , and approving them if they follow ; and that the fault is onely in mens obstinacy , if they repent not . Neither doe the Calvinists , as they surmise , make either Gods decree , or the defect of his grace in fault , if men repent not ; because they affirm that God decreed not to give them the grace to repent , nor doth give it them ; except eyther God may not require repentance of all , or be bound to give it to all . It is not my fault , that a drunkard fals and lyes in the street , though he cannot but both fall , and ly there , except I hold , and help him up ; except withall I be bound so to help him : nor my fault that a prodigal spend-thrift comes into debt , and is cast into prison , and cannot escape the one , or other , unlesse I pay his debts ; except withall I be bound to pay them : so neither is it Gods fault that men remain and peri●h in that impenitency , out of which they neither will , nor can come without Gods speciall gift of repentance , except it be Gods bounden duty ( as these men seem to make it ) to bestow that grace upon them . The two places Esa. 5. 1. 2. 3 , &c. and Math : 11. 21. 22 , we will a little more particularly examine . In the former where God saith , he could doe no more to his vineyard then he had done , he speaks onely of outward means , as the text makes it plain , I fenced it &c. I would ask these men , whether there be not requisite , that the naturall vineyard may bring forth fruit , something besides the fencing , gathering out of the stones , and the rest there mentioned ? It cannot be denyed , that , except besides , and above all these , God give the encrease by an inward blessing , all planting , & watering , and outward dressing whatsoever is nothing : so is it in the spirituall vineyard much more though planted by Paul himself , yea by Christ himself in the outward ministery . And where God saith , He expected sweet grapes , but it brought forth wild v : 4. we must not imagine ( as our adversaries seem to doe ) that God is deceaved in his expectation , as men often are : but onely , that the Israelites did not perform that which God required , and they ought . Touching the repentance of Tyre & Sidon . First I would know how they prove that Christ speaks of other then legall repentance , such as Ahab manifested in sack-cloth ? which was not from a godly sorrow for sin ; but from a servile fear of punishment . Secondly eyther this repentance should haue been wrought by those mighty works alone , or by them with other helps . Mighty works alone cannot work faith , & repentance , which must come by hearing , & instructions of the word , which they serve to confirm unto men . If Christ speak of his mighty works , as means though not sufficient of themselvs , yet availeable , with other requisite helps , he excludes not the spirits work , but includes it . But , in truth , the meaning of Christ seems to be no more , but to reprove the obstinacy of Corazin in a form of speach like unto that Luk. 19. 40. If these should hold their tongue , the stones would imediately cry out . And as it were a vain thing hence to dispute about the speaking of stones ; so is it , to gather any thing thence of the Tyrians repentance . The meaning of the Lord here is not to commend the Tyrians at all , but to upbraid the Chorazites , and to shew their hardnes of heart to be greater then the others . The like form of speach we haue to the like purpose Ezech : 3. 6. And if so be there were in these Tyrians this pronenes to repentance ▪ if they had enjoyed the means which the others did , but they wanted ; & withall , that God so desires the repentance & salvation of all ; how came it to passe , that God did not afford those helps unto them that were so prone and willing to have used them aright ? It seems , the former case is now altered , and that men might say to God , that they would , but he would not . ADVERSARIES . THeir invincible Argument servs onely to bewray their incurable disease in heaping together many Scriptures to prove that , which no man doubts of ; namely , that the works wrought in us by God are attributed to us also ; as the cleansing of our hearts &c : wherein yet they mingle with Gods truth their own errours , and that in particular , in affirming , that God takes it to himself as a proper title , to justify a sinner : and yet that Dasaith , he justified his heart . DEFENCE . FIrst , if it be proper to God to justifie a sinner , how is it common to David with him ? Secondly , They slaunder David in making him say , he justified his heart . Could David forgiue the sin of his heart ? which God doth in justifying a sinner . David Psal. 73. speaks of sanctification , not of justification . They ignorantly apply the Scriptures , Psal. 108. 12. & Psal. 118. 13. to Gods working grace in men , being meant onely of his working deliverance for them . They vainly , and deceitfully affirm , from Acts. 7. 51. & 13. 46. that man may resist the grace of God , wrought by his word and spirit . The places speak not of any grace wrought by either of them . The former speaks onely of resisting the spirit ; as the Authour of the word in the Prophets and others . The latter of resisting the word of God , not working , but offering grace onely . Besides , they notably abuse those Scriptures cited , in making them plainly to shew that man hath free choise ( to wit alike ) to work with God , or against God in the work of his grace . It is true , that men whether receiving or refusing grace , doe it freely , and without compulsion : but the latter freely of themselvs , being left of God to themselvs ; the former freely ▪ by Gods speciall grace , and spirit , giving them , and effectually drawing them to Christ. I say more effectually ▪ though not violently , then any one creature can by violence draw another . Oh , that any made partakers of this free grace of Gods spirit dwelling in them , should deny the powerfull work of it , to establish their own freewill ! After Scriptures , they come to experience . And first , they erre in thinking , that liberty and necessity of sinning in wicked men cannot stand together . It is certain , that the more wicked either man or devill is , he sinneth both the more freely , and the more necessarily . Their similitude , of a mans drinking poyson , is against themselvs , so far as it is pertinent . I would know of them how the drinking of poyson by any is unavoydable ? If they say , because hee knows it not to be in his drink , therin they grant that sins of ignorance are done unavoydably , and yet not by compulsion , as they conclude . Secondly , who would think , that any , after the profession of the knowledg , and obedience of the Gospell , which these men haue made , so many yeares , both in the Church of England , and else where , should so far apostate therefrom to Popery , and Pha●isaism , as to think it as easie a thing , for a man , yea , though never so wicked , to keep himselfe from all sin , as from drinking of poyson , which he knew to be in his cup ? For he that knows it not cannot avoyd it . How grievously erre they , in affirming , that all men are able to keep the Law , to wit , without the least fayling , all their life long , in thought , word or deed ? For this they plead in this whole Section , that except it be possible for every man thus to keep the Law , neither his conscience can accuse him , nor God justly punish him for breaking it . Neither doe the Calvinists hold , as they barbarously speak . ▪ & unjustly slander , that men commit evill by force of Gods providence , or are decreed to doe evill , or compelled to sin by power . But they beleev , as the Scriptures teach , that all men in Adam haue sinned , and by sin lost the Image of God in which they were made ; so as the Law is impossible unto them by reason of the flesh , and so cannot possibly but sin , by reason of the same flesh raigning in the unregenerate , and dwelling in all : ( which these light persons , expresly confesse in the sequel of this book : ) and that this so comes to passe by Gods holy decree , and work of providence answerable , not forceing evill upon any , but ordering all persons in all actions , as the supreme Governour of all : and that the wicked , being left of God ; some destitute of the outward means , the Gospell ; all of them of the effectuall work of the Spirit , from that weak flesh , and naturall corruption , daily increased in them , sin , both necessarily as unable to keep the Law ; and willingly , as having in themselvs the beginning and cause thereof , the blindnesse of their own minds , and perversenesse of their will and affections ; and so are inexcuseable in Gods sight . Here , with the lowd boasts of their large and undenyable proofs , they joyn sundry errours . As first , in making the good things of creation to come from Gods grace , viz. for salvation , of which our question is . The good things of creation the Scriptures account our own , and of our selvs , ever opposing them to the good things of grace , to salvation . Secondly , they err egregiously , in saying , that what Adam had in creation , and lost by transgression for himself and his posterity , that is restored through Christ , to wit , to all ; for so the question is . By this , all should be restored actually into Gods favour , haue his image repaired in them , and be wholly free from that weak flesh , making the Law impossible unto them . With like perversnesse doe they misapply to all Adams posterity without difference , that which the Apostle speaks of himselfe , and other godly Ministers , and Christians onely , Rom. 8. 3. 4 , 2 Cor. 3. 5 , Phil. 4 , 13 , as any that pleaseth to peruse the places , may see . Lastly , they most absurdly affirm , that the flesh through Christ is able to fulfill the Law ; wheras we fulfill the Law no further , then as we kill , crucifie , and destroy the flesh , and lusts thereof , by the Spirit . ADVERSARIES . TO the question , Whether a man can doe any thing in the work of his regeneration , they answer , after much froath of words , that faith and repentance is regeneration , and that it is most plain ( as what is not to their peircing eye ) that even in the work of regeneration , man may submit to it , or hinder it . DEFENCE . AN ignorant assertion , shewing the ground of their errour in not putting difference between Gods work , and mans . They may as rightly say , that the life and motion of the childe is its begetting . To regenerate is nothing else , but to beget anew . Doth the child beget it selfe ? Or doth not the parent onely beget it ? So God begets by the Ministery of the Word , and man is begotten by him : according to that of the Apostle , Every one that loveth him that begat , loveth him also that is begotten of him . So Iam. 1. 18. Of his own will begat he us , by the word of truth . By these mens doctrine we should beget our selvs of our own will. Begetting in creatures , is both in nature and time , before the being of the begotten . Men then before they be , must beget themselvs , by their saying . And as God regenerates , and not man ; so doth man , being regenerated , beleev and obey , and not God. Wheras , if faith and obedience be regeneration , then God beleevs and repents ; seeing God regenerates . Besides , as the outward means of regeneration may be , and are , by too many hindred from working , and made unprofitable : So where God pleaseth to add to the outward means , and motives of the Gospell , the inward work of the Spirit , of which Spirit , we are born or begot anew ; of the Spirit , I say , though by the Word ; by the same Spirit which he puts within them , he takes away first what might hinder thier regeneration , even their stony heart ; and giving them a heart of flesh , a heart to know God , and putting his fear in their hearts , and by putting his Spirit in them , causing them to walk in his statutes ; he thereby regenerates them , or giues them faith , and repentance , which they must haue before they can beleev or repent : as the childe must haue life before it can liue , or doe acts of life , and must be generated , or begotten , before it haue life , or being . Regeneration therefore goes before faith , and repentance . This Head they shut with answering three Scriptures . The first Math. 22 , but mistaken , for Luk. 14. 23 , which as it is frivolously objected ( if by any ) so is it easily answered . The second is , Ioh. 6. 44. No man can come to me except the Father draw him . This is not meant ( say they ) of violent compulsion . True , nor yet onely ( as they would haue it ) of outward teaching by heavenly doctrine : For thus the Father drew many that came not to Christ ; whereas hee speaks here , of such a drawing as is peculiar to them that come to him ; who shall never hunger , v. 35 , and whom he will in no wise cast out , v. 37. He speaks not therefore of the outward teaching onely , but withall , and principally , of the inward teaching of the spirit , as Esa. 54. 13 , Ier. 31. 33. 34 , 1 Ioh. 2. 27. The most of them whom the Father drew by heavenly doctrine , that is , to whom Christ preached , murmured at him , v. 41 : this hee reproues , vers . 43 , & vers . 44 , takes away the offence which might arise , at the consideration of the small effect which his words had with many , considering what he testified of himselfe , v. 39. 40 , shewing that such was mans perversenesse in spirituall things , as that except God , to the outward word , adjoyned the inward work of the Spirit , thereby drawing him , his obstinacy could not , nor would not be tamed , nor he turned to God. Lastly , to Phil. 2. 13. It is God that works in you both the will and deed , after much impertinent discourse , and many errours mingled among , they answer , that God doth this in men by reasons , and perswasions , that they would chuse life , and avoyd death . And first , they conclude without and against reason , that if the regenerate haue power to resist , they haue power not to resist : which is , as if a man should say , if a fool can doe foolishly , then he can doe wisely , or the like . Secondly , it is a slander upon the Calvinists , that they are divided in this point ; or that any of them affirms , that the elect though unregenerate , cannot resist good . Whilst they are unregenerate they can doe nothing else but resist in spirituall things : But God in time ( as he hath decreed ) by the spirit of regeneration , overcomes their corruption , and works in them , not to resist , but willingly to follow him , that calleth them . Thirdly , I would know what they mean by these phrases , of Gods sending his word and spirit to work our regeneration : and again , of God by the power of his word and spirit , shewing man the benefite of life &c. If they consider the spirit onely as the Authour of the word , speaking in the men of God , why doe they not say the Spirit and the Word , rather then , as they do , the Word and the Spirit ? Or how doth God send the spirit , thus understood , to work regeneration in men ? If they answer , that God is ready to giue the spirit , and so doth to them that will receiv it : first , to be ready to giue , is not to giue or send : secondly , they should understand , that to be willing to receiv spirituall things , is a main fruit and effect of regeneration , and therfore not a cause , as they mistake . For the will , thus holily bent , presupposeth the understanding divinely enlightned , whose direction it follows , and without which going before , it is blind and brutish . Neither can a man possibly will a thing , but as he understands it to be good for him . If the understanding be divinely inlightned , and the will holily bent , then the whole man is before regenerated , that is , begotten before of God by the spirit of regeneration . In truth , they but speak of Gods sending his Spirit to work in mans regeneration , as Senacherib by Rabsakah spake of Gods sending him against Ierusalem . He to cover the pride of violence ; and they to cover the pride of free-will , in bending it selfe , of itself , to receiv grace offered . To conclude this Head ▪ referring the Reader to the Arguments of conviction formerly laid down , I onely add thus much : that if God onely bend the will by perswasions of promises and threatnings , and works not otherwise , then by force of reasons , and by using strong arguments and perswasions , as they expresly affirm ; then , that , whose contrary , both the Scriptures and experience confirms , would ordinarily come to passe ; namely , that the wise and prudent should haue heavenly things revealed unto them , and discern them much more easily and effectually , then babes and weak persons ; and so should be converted sooner then they : specially sooner then harlots and light persons , considering how much better they mind and understand ; arguments and reasons of all sorts ; then the other . We therfore conclude with the Apostle , that God works in us both the will and the deed : not onely by his word working on us , but by his Spirit working in us : not onely by sending Paul to plant , by propounding strong arguments of perswasion , but also by giving the increase by the most effectuall work of his Spirit , inlightning the eyes of the understanding to see the force of those arguments , opening the heart to attend unto them , and so writing them in the same heart , and most inward parts , as they cannot be blotted out . CHAP. V. Of the Originall estate of Mankinde . THE main question here to be discussed is , whether all Infants sinned in Adam , and so be guilty of death , and condemnation naturally , and without mercy in Christ , or not ? This I will proue ( God willing ) against them ; answering , and disproving what they bring to the contrary , and that in their own order , as followeth . ADVERSARIES . INfants had no life , nor being , as Adam had , at that time , when God gaue the Law to Adam ; and therfore no Law was given unto them ; and therfore sinned not , nor were guilty of condemnation . DEFENCE . I Grant , that infants had then no life and being , as Adam had , to wit , actuall , and distinct : but affirm , that they had both , after a sort , and as the branches in the root . Odegos ( the guide of the blinde , as Rom. 2. 19 , ) affirms , pag. 114 , that mankind was in Adam in bodily substance ; they had therfore being in Adam after a sort , namely , so far as they were in him . If they had being in Adam any way , they had life also in him : for nothing in Adam was dead , but all living : their being therefore so far , as it was in him , was a living being . We reade Hebr. 7. 9 , that Levi payed tithes to Melchisedeck in Abraham . But how could this be , might one say , seeing Levi had then no life and being ? The Apostle answers , that he was in the loyns of his father Abraham , when Melchisedeck met him . And reason teacheth , that none can doe any act , but he must first be , nor doe it otherwise , then as he is . Levi therefore then had a kind of being , and that living , and reasonable also , as he performed that act of paying tithes . He in Abraham as a particular root : Mankind in Adam , as in a generall root . 2 That Infants had a Law given them , I thus proue . First , the word of God , Gen. 2. 17. In the day , that thou eatest of the tree of knowledge of good , and evill , thou shalt die the death ; shew , that whom God threatneth with death , to them he gaue the Law. The punishment Gen. 3. 17. 18. 19 , reacheth to all Adams posterity , and so the threatning , and by consequence the Law. Secondly , the Apostle teacheth , Rom. 2. 15 , that the Law is written in the hearts of the Gentiles , according to which Law of nature written in their hearts ( though they had it not written in tables of stone , as the Iews ) they shall be judged at the day of the Lord , v. 15. 16. 17. These Gentiles cannot be imagined to haue this Law thus written any other way , then as God in the beginning created Adam , and all mankind in him , after his Image , in righteousnesse and holinesse ; in which respect also they are said , to doe by nature the things contained in the Law , having also a naturall conscience in them , which without a Law were vain : Vnder which generall Law , binding the reasonable creature to faith and obedience in all things ( in disposition before use of discretion , and in act afterwards : ) the particular Law , Gen. 2 , is conteyned , and to be referred unto it . Thirdly , if infants haue reasonable soules , then haue they the faculties of understanding and will , though not the actuall use of them , as men haue . This understanding cannot be conceived by any to be without all disposition and pronenesse , either to the knowledg of God , or to ignorance , errour , and doubting of him ; nor this will to bee without all disposition , and inclination to will according to , or against Gods will. As the yong whelps and cubs , of Lyons , Beares , and Foxes , haue in their naturall and sensitiue faculties , a pronenesse and inclination to raven ; and every beast pronenesse to the things of its kind , after , actually performed , and practised by them : so haue infants necessarily in their reasonable faculties , a disposition , one or other , to understand and will things , specially such as concern God , by reason of the most naturall , necessary , and indossolible relation , between the reasonable creature , and the Creator , and that specially in those most noble faculties . The objection from Rom. 7. 1 , hath in it no colour of truth : for neither are there any such words , that the Law is given ( especially onely , which must be added ) to them that know it : neither doth the Apostle there intend at all , to shew to whom the Law was given , or not : but onely , that the Christian Church at Rome ( specially many of them being Iewes , as appears chap. 16 , ) to which he wrote , was not ignorant of the Law , whether generall or particular , to which he had reference in that place . To Deut. 11. 2 , besides things answered by Mr. Ainsworth , I adde , that Moses there excludes not onely infants , but many grown men as appears , v. 3. 4. The other two places Matth. 13. 9 , and 1 Cor. 10. 15 , exclude too many mens of years also , considering how few haue ears to hear , or understanding to judg aright of spirituall things . For the third head , and that all sinned in Adam , it is so plain from Rom. 5 , as they haue nothing at all to answer , though they object the place : onely they bring certain other Scriptures , in such a manner , as if they would disproue one Scripture by another . And indeed what exposition can be given , or evasion found , considering the expressenes of the words ? As by one man sinne entred into the world , and death by sinne , so death passed upon all men , for that ( or as the originall hath it ) in whom all men haue sinned . So v. 19 , As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners , &c. If they say , as some doe , that all are made sinners by imitation onely , they are clearly confuted ; first , by daily experience , in which it is plain , that children comming to some discerning , will lie , filch , and revenge themselvs , though they never heard lie told , &c. It is alas too evident , that they bring this corruption into the world with them . Secondly , by the Apostles words , v. 19 , For as by ones mans disobedience many were made sinners ; so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous . If wee bee made unrighteous onely by imitation of Adams sin , and not by his performing it , as our root naturally ; then we are made righteous onely by imitation of Christs righteousnesse , and not by his performing righteousnesse , and fulfilling the Law for us , as our spirituall root , in which wee are grafted by faith . Lastly , these Adversaries grant , that by Adams sin all his posterity haue weak natures ▪ by which when the commandement comes , they cannot obey , and liue ▪ but sin , and so die , Rom. 8. 3. Can they which are accustomed to doe evill ▪ doe well ? Or will these men never leav their godlesse custom of corrupting the words of the text , for advantaging of an evill cause ? For flesh , which the Text hath , they put nature : wheras it is without all question , that by flesh , the Apostle there understands properly , sin and sinfull flesh : as he expresly calleth it , and as is plain in the whole context , v. 1. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7 , &c. In all which hee opposeth the flesh to the spirit , and the sinfull life of the one , to the righteous life of the other . And I would know of these deep Divines , what but sin could possibly make Adams posterity unable to keep the Law ? This flesh , or nature , as they will haue it , must be contrary to this good and holy Law , and resist it . And is not that properly sinfull and unholy , which resists , and is contrary to that which is good and holy ; Lastly , this enemy to the Law of God in a man , must be in his soule . And what else can it be , then a disposition in the understanding , to ignorance and errour , touching God and heavenly things ; and an inclination in the will and affections to evill ? Which is as properly sinne , as their acts and effects are properly sinfull . Infants therefore bring sin properly into the world with them . Two things they here object : First , that Christ often accounts children , innocents , as Math. 18. 3. 4 , & 19. 14. I answer , first , not as they mean ; that is , such as haue in them nothing vertuous or vitious ; good , or evill ; but as being humble , and without pride ; and such , as unto whom the Kingdom of God , and his blessing did appertain . Secondly , He speaks not of all children , but of those , of , and in the Church . Their second objection is , that our soules being the subjects of sin , are created of God imediately . But to this objection , they that referrs the soules originall , imediately to Gods supernaturall , and indeed miraculous work , do giue divers answers , which these Adversaries should haue refuted . Amongst others , Mr. Ainsworths answer is worthy the consideration . But let us consider their proofs for the soules immediate creation . The first is , Act. 17. 26 , Of one bloud God made all mankind , &c. But this place makes rather against them ; seeing the body alone makes not mankind , but the soule with it , by which specially the man is . The next place is Heb. 12. 9 , whence they gather that Adam is the Father of our bodies , and God the Father of our Spirits . But first , the Text neither mentions Adam , nor can agree to him in the state of creation : seeing in that estate there was no use of correction . Secondly , it saith not , the fathers of our bodies , but of our flesh : nor the father of our Spirits , but of Spirits . And the meaning seems unto me ( with due respect had to other mens different judgment ) onely to be this : that if we giue honour to men ( our carnall or fleshly fathers ) chastening us , as they think good : how much more owe honour to our spirituall father , chastening us for our eternall good ? And surely God , in his kinde , is the father of the whole man , not of the soule onely : So is man , in his kinde , the father of the whole man , and not of the body onely . Lastly , seeing the drift of the place , is to shew , that God as a father , chasteneth his sons which he loveth , and on the contrary , that they that are not chastened , are not sons , and so haue not God for their Father , I see not how the Apostle can speak of the creation of soules , seeing in that respect , wicked and godly , children and bastards , haue God alike their father . The Preacher , ch . 12. 7 , speaks of the manner of the creation of the first man Adam onely : but no more proues that our soules or spirits are created by God imediately , then that our bodies are made of dust immediately . That ch . 8. 8 , hath no colour of proof in it . Against our fourth and last assertion , that all by Adams sin are guilty of death , Rom. 5. 12 , they cavill , that we were not in Adam to bring any soule to hell for the breach of that commandemant , Thou shalt not eat . Where , first ( to passe by their incongruity of speech ) they free Adam himselfe from the guilt of condemnation of which our question is , as well as his posterity , by that his sin ; seeing it brought not him himself to hell . But secondly , & for the thing it selfe : They grant , acording to the Scriptures , that death , as a part of the curse , came over all Adams posterity for his sin : And will they then deny , that eternall death was also due by the same law of justice ? Is not the justice of God infinite , and so requiring infinite satisfaction ? To what reasonable creature soever , the smallest punishment is due from God ; the greatest is due also in rigour of justice . And so the curse ( as they grant ) extending to Adams generation by his sin ; eternall condemnation , as the principall part of it , extendeth unto them necessarily , except mercy be shewed them . Neither will it help our Adversaries , that other creatures die also ; seeing their absolutely mortall condition limits their punishment to this present life : But such is not the estate of infants ; but their immortall soules , unto which their bodies at that day are to be reunited , makes the whole capable of a more full declaration of Gods justice , if he deale in severity therof without mercy , as he may . Besides , the Apostle saith , that death passed upon all , for that all haue sinned , viz. in that one man Adam . Doth death come over bruit beasts , because they haue sinned in Adam ? They are brutish that see not the difference , which these men will not acknowledge . It is said else-where , that in Adam all die . Doe beasts die in Adam , as his posterity doth ? As all that are Christs , are in Christ , and made aliue by him ; so all Adams posterity were in him , and die in him : Which death also the Apostle makes no lesse , then judgement to condemnation , to wit , if redemption be not obtained : to which he opposeth justification , and eternall life . Ioyn herewith , these mens confession , that all mankind by Adams fall are made unable to keep Gods precepts , when he giues them , and so all fall under the wrath of God , and are therfore said to be children of wrath , Eph. 2. 3 , and there is sufficient for their conviction , as hath been shewed . But I add , that the Apostle means plainly a further matter , and that all are born children of wrath : for to be so by nature , and to be born so , are the same . We are children of wrath by sin onely : If therefore all be children of wrath by nature , it is by the sin of nature , which we call originall sin , and not by actuall sin onely , as they surmise . Lastly , I demand whether , if Adam had not sinned , hee should not haue transferred to his posterity the Image of God after which he was created , and a pronenesse to keep it . ( as notwithstanding sin , he doth some feeble remainders thereof ) and therewith right to eternall life ? If yea , why not then sin , and the guilt thereof , by proportion , having sinned ? To Ezech. 18 , I haue formerly answered . He speaks of the sins of immediate parents , not of the first sin of our first father ; which was naturall : whereas the other but personall ; yea , not onely other mens , but his after sins also . Secondly , it is plain , he speaks of such children , as seeing all their fathers sins , consider , and doe not the like , but doe that which is lawfull , and right , keeping , and doing all Gods statutes . To such God imputes no sin . Their affirmation following is strange , that Infants shall receiv no judgment , because they haue done neither good nor evill , according to which all judgment passeth . By this , they should neither be saved , nor damned : for what else is it to receiv judgment of salvation , but to be saved ? and so for the contrarie . They doe ignorantly exclude Infants from a state one , or other , for wanting that condition , which is required of men of years onely . They might as probably say , that Infants shall be damned ; seeing Christ saith , He that beleevs not shall bee damned : or should not eat , because it is said , He that will not work shall not eat . To the place , Ps. 51. 5 , Behold I was brought forth in iniquity , and in sin did my mother conceiv me ; they answer not directly , but by many Ifs , & ands : chusing many uncertain vanities , rather then one certain truth : which is , that David in this whole context confesseth his transgression and sin . And as men ascend by the stream to the fountain ; so doth he in those words to the fountain of all evill . As if he should haue said ; Lord , I am not onely stayned with , and guiltie of these particular evils ; but I am even wholly corrupt by nature from the very womb , and haue brought a fountain of sin into the world with me , from whence these particular mischiefs haue issued . ADVERSARIES . THeir Answers follow . The first is , that David confesseth that he is made , as Ps. 103. 14 , of weak flesh , and unable to resist the Tempter , being dust , &c. DEFENCE . DOth mans being made of dust make him unable to resist the Tempter ? Then God making Adam of the dust made him unable to resist the Tempter also ; which both crosseth the truth , and their own assertion . The Prophet , Psal. 103. 14 , speaks of bodily weaknesse and frailtie onely , which is nothing at all to the matter in hand ; and which , if it had been greater in David , would haue been more advantageable against that sin into which he fell . Next , for their advantage , they corrupt the Text , Rom. 8 , in saying , Christ came in sinfull flesh : where the Text saith , hee came in the similitude of sinfull flesh . He came in nothing sinfull , but all holy , and pure from sin . So doe they that , 2 Cor. 5. 21 , leaving out for us : which shewes , how Christ became sin for us : that is , as our Surety , and lyable to the curse due to our sinns ; but not in sinfull flesh , as they erroneously say . Thirdly , they absurdly affirm , that the sin of his mother , whether Hevah , or that bare him , is that sin or punishment layd upon her , which he here confesseth , in saying , I was conceived in sin . David confesseth a sin as evill , wheras all punishments are Gods good work : yea his own sin onely of which he desires forgiuenesse . Neither doe the words here at all agree with those , Gen. 3. 16 , as they say . The Reader that will , may see them opened at large by Mr. A●nsworth . They add , that it is frequent with the Holy Ghost to call punishments for sins , by the name of sins . But first , not so frequent by a 1000 times , as to call the transgression of the Law sinn : secondly , the phrase in sin : is never taken but properly , as to be in sin , to liue in sin , to continue in sin , to die in sin ; and specially to be born in sin ; as Ioh. 9. 34 , the Pharisees in so judging , followed the errour of the Pythagorean Philosophers : thirdly , where Christ is sayd to bear our sins , it is primarily in regard of the guilt , as he was our Surety . Of what sin of his mother was David guilty ? They unjustly accuse us , as saying , that David sinned in being born and conceived ; or that the very matter and substance wherof David was made , was sin . Vayn are they , in imagining such vain things of us . David was meerly a patient in being born , and sinned not therin ; neither yet did his mother sin , either in conceiving or bearing him , though shee conceived and brought him forth in sin . But he having sinned in Adam , as in a generall root , was so conceived and brought forth , by his mother , in sin . Secondly , it is one thing to be conceived and born in sin , another thing to be made of sin . The former , David affirms of himself ; the latter , they vainly impute to us , and refute in us , with many words . That Infants are under condemnation ; that is , naturally guilty thereof , hath been formerly proved : that actuall faith in Christ is required for their reconciliation to God , doth not follow hereupon . Actuall , I say , for the seed of faith they haue , and of all graces : ( for but by Gods holy Spirit in them , which carries all graces with it , they cannot be holy ; and so not bee glorified , if they be not holy first : ) but that hereupon they need actuall faith , is their saying , without proof . Actuall sins indeed require actuall faith : but for sin in disposit on ( called originall ) why may not faith in disposition suffice , through the mercy of God , for the applying of it ? About the Infants of Sodom and Gomorrah , they discourse marvellously , as first , in ranking them in their deaths with unreasonable creatures in theirs : secondly , in making them not onely innocent , but godly also . The Scriptures teach , that besides the temporary death , those Cities suffer the vengeance of eternall fire . Let them proue children not to haue been of those Cities . If God exempted them , or any of them , from that vengeance , it was not for any condition cōmon to them with bruit beasts , as they insinuate , but with respect to Christ ; besides whom , the Scriptures acknowledg no other Saviour , nor no other salvation , but by him . ADVERSARIES . TO a question moved by themselves , What need Infants haue of Christ , if they be not under condemnation : they answer , that through his redemption they liue , and moue , and haue their being , and injoy all other earthly blessings , with resurrection from the dead , and glorification , 1 Cor. 15. 12. DEFENCE . THus they make Christ and Infants amends . But how proue they , that by Christs redemption they liue , moue , & c ? The Scripture Act. 17 , to which they haue reference is meant of the naturall life of all , by Gods work of creation and providence ( which is nothing but continuation of creation ) and nothing at all to Christ as Redeemer . The redemption for which Christ came is from sin , and so from the curse due for sin , as the Scriptures every where testifie . The first Adam was made a living soule , the last Adam a quickning spirit . We haue therfore our naturall life , motion , and being ( common to Heathens with Christians ) by the first Adam ; our spirituall , and glorious life , by the second . Lastly , the Apostle saying , 1 Cor. 15. 22 , In Christ shall all be made aliue , speaks onely of all beleevers , as is evident , v. 14. 17. 18. 19 , who haue Christ for the first fruits , and are Christs , v. 20. 23. Are any Christs but Christians ? Is not the lump and the first fruits one ? Men should haue risen again , though Christ had never come , or been promised ; but to condemnation : Our resurrection , onely in regard of the glory of it , is from Christs glorious resurrection . And if Infants haue glorification from Christ , then they haue the pardon of sinne from Christ also , 1 Cor. 15. 17. 23 , and therewith his Spirit dwelling in them for sanctifying and quickning them , Rom. 8. 9. 10. 11. These men divide Chrst , making him a King to some for glorification , to whom hee is not a Priest for redemption by his bloud . Next , to a question by themselvs moved , How wee must haue the Son , they answer , by keeping his commandements ; forgetting faith , by which alone we receiv Christ : from which followeth loue , purity of heart , and obedience . Which faith hath more properly the consideration of a condition , as a hand to receiv a promise ; then of an act of obedience to a commandment . It is true ( being rightly understood ) which they add , that repentance is of all sin : to wit , particularly of all sins known ; and generally of sins unknown . For , Who can understand his errours ? Cleanse thou me from secret faults , said he , that observed , and knew his wayes better then either these men , or I. Doe they think nothing amisse slips from them , in thought , word , or deed , or ever hath done , whereof they doe not , or haue not repented particularly ? Is their knowledge so perfect as they need not pray for further enlightning , as Eph. 1. 17. 18 ? Are they certain they are ignorant of , and erre in nothing in the Scriptures , written for their bearning ? This their book sufficiently reproues their Pharisaicall dream of perfection . Where speaking of Idolatry they affirm , that God cannot bee worshipped after a false manner , they expresly contradict the Scripture , saying , The people did sacrifice still in the high places , yet unto the Lord their God onely . Here was worshipping the true God , and him onely , and yet after a false manner in a respect . The same the Apostle teacheth the Athenians , The God whom you ignorantly worship , declare I unto you . When Papists direct their prayers to God , the maker of the world , and father of Iesus Christ , hoping the rather to be heard by means of the Virgin Maries intercession , who doubts but they worship the true God , but in a false manner ? Neither doth Deut. 18. 20 , proue the sin one , of speaking in the name of a false God , and speaking falsehood in the name of a true God , but divers ; though both deserving death . Next , they in their wilde order , come to treat of Faith : where they affirm , that no man can haue faith to justification , before he haue repented . If they had sayd , that no man hath the grace or habit of faith before the grace of repentance , it had been true : ( God , by the spirit of regeneration , infusing the habits of all graces at once : ) But that the act and exercise of faith in beleeving , is before our repenting , appears both by Scripture and common sense . We liue the life of Christ ( wherof our repenting is a part ) by the faith of the Sonne of God. God purifieth the heart by faith : and justifies the ungodly by his faith . In all which it is plain , that faith hath the preheminence and first work . So 2 Cor. 7. 10 , Godly sorrow workes repentance . Repentance then presupposeth godly sorrow . Godly sorrow , or whatsoever is truely godly , must needs please God , which without faith no man can doe ; but even every thing is sin . Faith working that which worketh repentance , must goe before it . Secondly , godly sorrow is not onely for the fear of punishment ( for so the devils are sorrie ) but for the offence of God specially . Now none can be sorrie for his offending God , except he loue God ; nor loue him , except he know first that he bee loved of him in Christ , in which faith consisteth . We beleev therefore , before we repent , in the truth of the thing , and order of causes ; though we can hardly discern this order in our own sense . CHAP. VI. Of Baptisme . IN the next place they come to Baptism , in which they think themselvs in their element , as a fish in the water . And beginning with Iohns Baptism , they will haue it so called , as Paul cals the Gospell his , Rom. 1. 16 , But they mistake . It was so called , because Iohn was ( under God ) the first , both instituter , and exerciser of it . By their rule Iohn Murton , might be called Iohn Baptist. Secondly , they err in saying , Baptism is repentance for the remission of sins , &c. Repentance goes before Baptism : Repentance is inward ; the Baptism outward , of which our question is . God giues repentance ; Men confer Baptism : Repentance is mans work ; for it is man that repenteth by grace : Baptism ( considered as inward ) is Gods work ; as outward , the Ministers under God. They affirm , p. 169 , that the baptizing , or washing , of which we speak , is an action of the hand . Is repentance so with these men ? Indeed that repentance upon which they rebaptize , is rather the work of their hands , then of Gods. The Scriptures alledged , pag. 129. 130 , shew what is required of men of years , before they be baptized : but are misapplyed , as a bar , to the Infants of beleevers . Divers of them might more colourably , though alike untruely , be brought to proue , that no infants could be saved ; as else-where hath been shewed them . Their answer to the objection , pag. 130 , is but the fencing of their own stroak . We willingly acknowledge , that the doctrine and practise for baptizing men of years , brought to beleev by preaching , and unbaptized before , is perpetuall . This was the state of the persons instanced ; and this alone the places cited doe proue . ADVERSARIES . AGainst the baptizing of Infants , they alledg , that there is neither commandment , nor example , nor true consequence for it in Chrsts Testament , which is perfect , &c. DEFENCE . THE perfection of Christs Testament we avow , and that the estate of the Church under the Ministery , and Institution of the Apostles , those great Maister-builders , was most perfit , as otherwise , so in respect of Ordinances . But in saying , that we grant , that there is neither commandement , nor example for baptising infants , they take their own presumption for our grant . We grant that the Scriptures no where say in expresse terms Baptise infants , or that Infants were baptised : But withall they should consider with us , that whatsoever can by just consequence be drawn out of the Scriptures , expounded in their largest extent , is conteined in them first : els how could it truly be drawn out of them ? whatsoeuer then can be drawn by true consequence out of a commandement , is commanded in it , though not expresly , yet truly , and aswell , as if it were expressed . Else how could all duties towards God and our neighbour be commanded in the decalogue , called the ten commandements ? Surely not ; except things be commanded which are not expressed , if by consequence they can be gathered . Else how could Christ say frō Deuteronomy . It is written , Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God , and him onely shalt thou serue ? Whereas the word onely , upon which the speciall weight of Christs answer lyeth , is not expressed , but the thing onely included , & thence to be truely , & necessarily collected . But let us trace their foot-steps in disproving manifestly our consequences , and taking away clearly all our objections to every mans conscience , in the sight of God : If bold promises may bee taken for due performances . And first , in observing what Baptism is , they again untowardly confound the inward and outward Baptism . Which though they ought not to be separated by Gods appointment , yet are too oft by mans default , and should alwaies by us be distinguished : the outward , as the work of mans hand , as themselvs elsewhere confesseth ; from the inward , as the work of God alone : the former being with water , the latter with the Holy Ghost ; as Iohn expresly distinguisheth his baptizing , and Christs that came after him . The meaning of the English Primer , and of Vrsinus , they mistake . They speak of the inward and outward Baptism joyntly : wheras our question is , of that which is outward , and in mans power to giue , or with-hold . So the faith and repentance , which they require in persons to be baptized , is actuall indeed , in men of years , but in Infants onely in disposition . Neither doth Ursinus simply say , that the Sacraments are no Sacraments in an unlawfull use ▪ as they cite him , but that they are not Sacraments , but to them that receiv them with true faith , onely they haue benefit by them . In like manner , the Apostle tels the Corinthians ; that their comming together , was not to eat the Lords Supper ; that is , not for the better , as v. 17 ; else they did eat the Lords Supper outwardly . So elsewhere , Hee is not a Iew , which is one outwardly ; neither that circumcision , which is outward in the flesh , that is , not , that wherein God took delight ; else , he was a Iew , and that was circumcision , after a sort . I demand of these Rebaptizers , whether Simon Magus , being baptized by Phillip , and yet remaining in the gall of bitternes , and without all part in the ministration of the Gospell : and so whether those false brethren creeping in unawares , and being ( without doubt ) baptized by the Apostles , or others , had that inward , and greater Baptism or no ? If not , as is plain , how were their Baptism a Sacrament in the lawfull use ? And if God gaue any of them repentance afterward , were they to be baptized anew as being unbaptized before , because they wanted the inward and greater Baptism , when they received the other ? I suppose no , even in these mens judgments . If any object , that the fault here was onely in the baptizeds unfitnesse in Gods sight , he saith truely , but must withall remember , that notwithstanding , the inward and greater Baptism wanted , which by their ground should haue made a meer nullity of the other . And note heerewith as of speciall consideration , that Baptism is most corrupted by an unworthy receiver : since both the Baptism is ministred , and the baptizer ministreth for the baptizeds sake ; who being impure himselfe , all things are impure unto him : and that his baptism , no baptism of the Lord to him in right use , but rather a prophane usurpation , till by his faith and repentance , God afterwards giving them , it become the Lords baptism to him , for the confirmation of hi● faith , in the bloud-shedding of Christ for his sins . Neither is it requisite , that we proue , as they require of us , that Infants haue faith and repentance : but let them proue , which they presume , but proue not , that the actuall having , and manifesting of these graces ( being conditions requisite for men of years ) are to be exacted of Infants , if they be admitted to Baptism . May they not as reasonably , and charitably , conclude , that Infants are not to eat , because they worke not , from 2 Thess. 3 ; and are to be damned , because they beleev not , from Mark. 16. 16. And was there not that required at Abrahams hands for his circumcision , which was not required at Isaaks for his ? Or not more of such Heathenish men of yeares as became Proselytes , then of their Infants , to be circumcised with them ? The ground of this errour in so many is , that they understand not the true nature of the Gospell , and Ordinances thereof . The Gospell aymes not at the exacting upon man ( as made after Gods own image ) obedience due , as a naturall debt from the creature to the Creator , as the Law doth , but considers him as a most miserable creature ▪ drowned in sin , and altogether unable to help himselfe : neither yet servs it , and its Ordinances , primarily to declare and manifest , what man in right owes , and performs to God ; but what God in mercy , purposeth , & doth , and will perform to man : being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a joyfull message , or glad tydings of salvation by Christ. So , to apply this for the baptizing of Infants , albeit they on their part , can for the present , make no manifestation or declaration of obedience or thankfulnesse , or any other goodnesse : yet sufficeth it for Evangelicall dispensation , that God , according to the Covenant of grace , I will be thy God , and the God of thy seed , can and will make manifestation and declaration of his gracious minde of washing them , with the bloud and spirit of his Son , from the guilt and contagion of sin : they also , being bound in their times , to reciprocall duties . Let us not think scorn , as proud free-willers doe , of Gods taking , both of us , and our infants , to be his people , going before our , or their taking of him to be our God : But let us rather magnifie his mercie in this regard , both towards us , and them . ADVERSARIES . NExt , they undertake to proue , that Infants are not regenerate , and so not to be baptized . Their reason is , because they haue not faith and repentance . This Regeneration they define to be a turning from sin to God : which they would proue from Rom. 6. 11. DEFENCE . THE Apostle , Rom. 6 , speaks not of regeneration it self , which is Gods work : but of our living to God , as an effect therof . For as our naturall life is an effect of our first generation , or begetting by our parents : so is our spirituall life an effect of our regeneration by God , and his Word , and Spirit . Turning from sin is mans work , by Gods grace : Regeneration is Gods work , not mans . So for Repentance , they roav about it on all sides , but scarse touch the true nature of it . Repentance , to wit , Evangelicall , required for Baptism in men of years , is neither a sight , and knowing of sin by the Law , for that the wicked also doe : nor a confessing of sin , for that is outward , and follows repentance in the heart : nor a sorrow for sin , for that goes before it : nor a promise to forsake sin , for that follows after it , as an outward effect : no , nor yet properly , an endevour to forsake it , though that come nearest . Repentance is properly , a growing wise afterwards , and changing of the minde from sin to God , in the purpose of the hea●t● , having an effectuall endevour to forsake sin accompanying it , as the effect thereof . Now their argumentation in this place , that because Infants haue not faith , and repentance , to wit , actuall , and that in manifestation also ( which are the conditions required in men of years for their Baptism , and the inseparable fruits of regeneration ) therefore they are not regenerate , and so not capable of Baptism , is , as if some idiot would affirm , that infants are not born , nor to be reputed reasonable creatures , nor endued with the faculties of understanding and reason , because they make no manifestation thereof , no more then bruits doe . Their proofs against the Regeneration of Infants thus disproved , I manifest the contrary , as followeth . Christ the Lord teacheth , that except a man be born , or ( as the word more properly imports ) begot again , hee cannot enter into Gods Kingdom . Either therfore regeneration is to be granted Infants , or Gods Kingdom to be denyed them . If any say , this is meant of men of years onely , the Text convinceth him ; which opposeth the first birth , or generation , ( which is of Infants ) to the second regeneration : The first , as v. 6 , being of the flesh , making them so born uncapable of Gods Kingdom , without the second , by the spirit . Secondly , they confesse , else-where , that all , by Adams fall haue that weak flesh , Rom. 8. 3 , by which they cannot keep the Law , &c. Now I demand , whether Infants to be glorified , carry this weak flesh , ( hindring thus effectually true holinesse ) into heaven with them , or no ? If not , as is certain , then it must be purged out of their soules , and hearts , as the seat , and subject therof . But nothing can purge out that which is contrary to holinesse , saue the holy Spirit of God , the Spirit of regeneration , which lusts against the flesh , and is contrary unto it : either therfore they must be regenerated , or not glorified . Thirdly , the Scriptures teach , that by the spirit of Christ , which is the spirit of life for righteousnesse , dwelling in us , our bodies shall be quickned , and raised up unto glory . Children therefore , by their grant , being to be raised again , and glorified by Christ , must haue Christs spirit , which is the spirit of sanctification , and regeneration , dwelling in them . Lastly , joyn with these things , that all are by nature , I say by nature , with the Apostle , not by act alone , as say the Adversaries , children of wrath , having right to wrath , as children to their fathers inheritance ; and therewith , that baptism is the lavacher , or washing of regeneration ; it will follow , that children , if to be freed from the wrath to come , and glorified , are to be regenerated and baptized also . Christ saues , and so glorifies , his body onely , which is the Church ; which he sanctisies with the washing of water , and the word : and there is one body , and one baptism . ADVERSARIES . THeir Answers to the Scriptures , brought for the baptizing of the Infants of beleevers follow . To Act. 2. 38. 39. Repent , and be baptized every one of you &c. for the promise is unto you , and to your children , and to all that are a farre off , even as many as the Lord shall call : they answer , that this is meant of such fathers of the Iews , and their children , and fathers of the Gentiles , and their children , as beleev , viz. both fathers and children , and that by children are oft meant men of yeares , in the Scriptures , specially Abrahams children . DEFENCE . THat such are sometimes meant , wee grant : but deny that meaning in this place . And first , by them a far off , are not meant the Gentiles far off in state , as Eph. 2 , but the Iews , far off in time , as the originall carries it . Besides , neither was Peter himselfe , as yet , sufficiently perswaded of the calling of the Gentiles , Act , 10 : neither if he had , was it , as yet , seasonable to mention that matter to the Iews . Secondly , in saying , the promise is made to you , and your children , hee speaks of some solemn promise made to them all , and the same to haue its fruit and effect in them , and their children with them , upon their repentance . This could be no other , then that promise made to Abraham , I will be thy God , and the God of thy seed , in that blessed seed Christ. Thirdly , he exhorts the Iews to repent , and to be baptized , for that the promise was unto them and their children ; and therein shews , that he speaks not of a promise made to Abrahams children , upon their faith and repentance , as they mistake : but on the contrary exhorts to repentance , upon a promise made . The promise is the ground of the exhortation , and presupposed by the Apostle , as going before it . Hence also it is , that hee cals the Iews , which had denyed and killed the Lord of life , and not yet repented , as appears , v. 19 , Children of the Prophets , and of the Covenant , which God made with the fathers : with which accords that , Act. 13. 32. 33. They were not therfore here called , the children of the promise because they repented ; for that they did not : but because they came of Abraham , Isaak and Iakoh , and so had Christ promised unto them as their King and Saviour : and so were by faith and repentance to receiv the fruit of the same promise , and the confirmation or seal thereof by Baptism to them and their children . Of which here , and every where , they are exhorted not to depriue themselvs and theirs . Neither is this exhortation to repent , and be baptized , made to the children , but to the parents for the obtaining of the benefite and confirmation by Baptism , of the promise both to parents and children . If any demand , Was not Christ promised to the Gentiles also ? I answer , not as to the Iews : He was promised to the Iews ( indefinitely , as the Church of God , and Abrahams seed ) as being their King ; but to become the King of the Gentiles : the Iews were his Citizens ; the other were , by faith , to become his Citizens , and of the houshold of God. ADVERSARIES . TO 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unholy , but now are they clean : they answer , that the beleevers children were no otherwise holy , then as their unbeleeving wiues were holy , namely , to be used by their parents . DEFENCE . HEre first , as commonly , they treasonably clip the Lords coyn in leaving out , for their advantage , to the beleeving husband , and to the beleeving wife . The Apostle saith simply , The children are holy ; so saith he not simply , that the unbeleeving wife is holy ; but holy to her beleeving husband ; and the unbeleeving husband sanctified , or holy , to the beleeving wife : as all things are pure to the pure . Now for the better clearing of this place , the Apostles drift is to be considered : which was to teach beleeving husbands , that they might lawfully , and without scruple , keep , and converse with their unbeleeving wiues , ( and so beleeving wiues with their unbeleeving husbands ) as being sanctified to them , though not in themselvs . This he proues by an Argument taken from their children , Else were your children unclean , but now are they holy : that is , if the beleeving husband might not lawfully retain his unbeleeving wife , then the children so born should be unholy : but they are holy . Whereupon it follows , that he may lawfully keep and converse with her . This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , else , or otherwise , ever includes in it a casuality : as Math. 18. 32 , because thou desiredst me : & ch . 27. 6 , because it is the price of bloud . So 1 Cor. 5. 10 , Else , or for then you must goe out of the world : As if he had said ; seeing Christians are not to goe out of the world , but to liue in it , they may therfore eat with the fornicators of the world : So here , seeing your children thus born are not unclean , but holy ; therfore you may and ought to retain your ( though unbeleeving ) wiues . The Apostle therfore making the children holy , and their holinesse a ground of the husbands lawfull keeping , and conversing with his wife , can haue respect to no other thing then the Covenant with Abraham , I will be thy God , and the God of thy seed ; as a known and received ground by the Corinthians , and all other Churches . This will yet be the more plain , if we bear in mind , that the question propounded to Paul by the beleeving Corinthians was , not whether they might keep their children or no , but their wiues . Hee had therfore no occasion of mentioning the children , as he doth , but to fetch from them an Argument for the retaining of the wiues . Now , if his meaning were , as they say , that the children were holy to the beleevers use , as the wife was , then he should haue argued from the holinesse of the wife , to proue the holinesse of the children : But thus he doth not , but the clean contrary . Besides , if the Apostle had argued as they would haue him , where had he laid the foundation of his proofe ? Or how had he removed the scruple out of the Corinthians hearts ? They add , that the Corinthians made no question of their children . True ; and that overthrows their exposition ; as shewing , that the Apostle argues not from the wiues to the children , as they make him ; but from the children to the wiues : Secondly , the Apostle disputes not from the Corinthians supposition , or perswasion , but from the truth of the thing , the holinesse of their children . But now are ( your children ) holy . They object , that these children must be holy , either as the beleeving , or unbeleeving part is holy . We say they are holy as the beleeving part , in regard of that foederall holinesse , and the spirit of regeneration . Then , say they , They are separated from common uses in which they were used , and are set now apart to Gods use . We say they are , as were the Infants in Israel , set apart , or severed , from the world , and taken into the number of Gods people . They themselvs affirm , a few lines before , that Israel was sanctified and set apart from common and prophane uses , to the service of God. And were not the Infants part of Israel , thus set apart , and sanctified ? And yet could they not testifie any purity of heart , or other grace . That which in the very same period they build with one hand , they pull down with another . Secondly , if ( as they say ) Infants bee no otherwise sanctified , then to the use of others , and as unbeleevers are , then can they not be saved : except the unholy can enter into Gods Kingdom . They object further , that then all the children of beleevers , though of age , and unbeleevers , should be holy also . But why rather holy , then Innocent , which they will haue all Infants to be ? By their unbelief , they are cut off from Gods Covenant , as the Iews were , and from all holinesse therby . The next objection is ill framed , as they set it down ; and the answer worse . The errour in both is , that they consider not Iohns Baptism , and Christs according to their distinct parts ; Iohns as outward , Christs as inward : Iohns outward Baptism , and Christs outward Baptism were the same : for Christ was baptized by Iohn , thereby sanctifying Baptism to us , as circumcision to the Fathers by his being circumcised . The inward Baptism is not common to all , but peculiar to the elect : the outward , whether by Christ , or Iohn , is not peculiar to the elect onely , but common to others with them : witnesse Simon Magus . The outward Baptism by Iohn , and all other Ministers was , and is , onely with water , opposed to Christs , as the inward with the Holy Ghost . Which Baptism with the Holy Ghost , being understood of extraordinarie gifts , sometimes went before the other , as Act. 10. 47 , but commonly followed upon it : But understood of ordinarie graces , did , or should , alwaies goe before it in right order of things . Next follows , 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2 &c. The meaning of the H. Ghost herein they take upon them to explain to others , not understanding it themselvs , as is evident , in that they will haue this baptizing unto Moses in the clovd , and sea , &c. to haue been onely for bodily deliverance , and the offer of Christ. But the Apostle looks upon those things with a more piercing and spirituall eye : as appears , first in that , v. 1 , he cals the Israelites indefinitely , his and the Corinthians fathers . Morever brethren I would not haue you ignorant , that all our fathers &c. As if hee should haue said , Let not the children look for more priviledg from punishment , if they sin , then their fathers haue injoyed . He therfore considers the Church of israel here , as in the state of a spirituall fatherhood to the Corinthians . Secondly , hee expresly saith , that they were all baptized to Moses , and that the meat was spirituall which they eat , and the rock , or water , which they drank spirituall , even Christ himselfe , to wit , sacramentally , and mystically . Thirdly , the Apostles argument , that it may goe in full force , must thus be framed . They that are alike for substance in Gods benefits , shall alike be punished , if they sin alike : But you Corinthians now , and Israel of old were , and are alike in those spirituall benefites mentioned ; Therefore , if you sin , as they did , you shall surely be punished , as they were . If the Apostle had propounded unto the Corinthians , the tokens of Gods loue and protection onely for bodily things , as they carnally conceiv , there had been no force in his reason against the security of the Corinthians , especially occasioned by their enjoying the Lords Ordinances of Baptism , and the Supper as signes , and tokens of Gods loue for spirituall blessings in heavenly things . Might they not easily haue answered Paul , that the Israelites indeed might well perish , and be destroyed for such things as they practised , having onely Gods loue-tokens for bodily deliverance : but for them , they were better secured against danger , as having the tokens of Gods loue for spirituall and eternall deliverance , by the body and bloud-shed of Christ ? I conclude therefore , that all Pauls , and the Corinthians fathers , being baptized with the Baptism signifying deliverance by Christ , and many of them being Infants , the Infants of Israel now are to be baptized also . ADVERSARIES . THey object , that the meaning of the Holy Ghost is not , that Moses did at all wash them with water in the cloud and sea . DEPENCE . NEither say we he did ; but with the Apostle , that they were baptized to Moses in the cloud and sea : God not onely preserving them bodily thereby from Pharaoh ; but also moystening them with the cloud arising out of the Sea , and showering down waters upon them , as the Lords peculiar people , and for spirituall use ( the Apostle himselfe in this place bearing witnesse ) under the Ministerie of Moses their Pastor or Shepheard ; procuring with this , the other blessings , even of the meat which was spirituall from heaven ; and drink which was spirituall , even Christ mistically out of the rock . Besides , our Adversaries hold back the better part of Gods loue , in saying , he offered them Christ in the drink out of the rock . If the rock were Christ , and they drank of the rock , then God not onely offered , but they also received , and drank of Christs bloud , as the Corinthians did , in mysterie . Secondly , the Apostles argument , as they put it , had been too blunt to haue peirced the Corinthians consciences ; who might easily haue answered themselvs and him , that the Israelites indeed had Christ in their time offered ; but for themselvs they received him also , and so were better fenced against Gods plagues ; yea , though they sinned , then the other were . Thirdly , it is neither true , which after they affirm , that Noahs Ark is called the figure of Baptism , but that the saving of eight soules by water ( to wit bearing up the Ark ) had Baptism , that now saveth &c. for a like figure , or antitype : much lesse is it said , that Noah and his family were Baptized in the Ark , or water , as it is expresly said , that the Israelites were baptized in the cloud , and Sea. Every type of Baptism , is not Baptism , but hath onely something necessarily , which resembles it . But the more agreement there is , between Noahs Arke , and the Baptism now , the more firm Argument may be gathered for the baptizing of Infants . It is evident , that Noah through faith prepared the Ark for the saving of his houshold , and not of himselfe alone . To their objection , that there is as much warrant to enjoyn Infants to suffer persecution , because it is called by the name of baptism , as to baptize them , because the cloud and sea is called Baptism : I answer ( passing by their incongruities of speech ) that Infants may be persecuted , as well as men of yeares . Witness Christ himself , persecuted in his mothers lap by Herod . Besides , the Israelites ( and their Infants with them ) are heere said to haue been baptized by water in spirituall use , and consideration . ADVERSARIES . THeir next answer to such Scriptures , as shew that whole housholds haue been baptized , and therefore Infants , as a part of the houshold , is , that there are many housholds in which there are no infants ; and that therefore except we proue such housholds to haue had Infants , it is nothing . Secondly , that it is most true , that as the Apostles practised in one houshold , so they practised in all : and that therfore they baptizing in the laylors house such as beleeved , did not baptize infants . DEFENCE . WEE grant , that the Apostles practise was the same , where there was the same reason : but as some Families had in them infants , and some not ; so all of years in some beleeved , and in some not : according to which diversity of persons , they administred Baptism diversly ; and not alike in all housholds . Secondly , if these men would haue taken any sound course for the clearing of things , they should here haue given answer to such Scriptures , as else-where haue been brought against them , to shew , how the tenour of the Lords promise , and blessing , runnes upon godly Governours , and their Families with them : and more specially to that about Lydia , Act. 16 , of whom it is testified , that she having her heart opened to attend and beleev the Gospell , both she and her houshold were baptized . But it is easier for these men to repeat over the same things many times , then once to justifie them . ADVERSARIES . TO the Scriptures record , that little children were brought to Christ , that he might lay his hands on them , and pray , or blesse them ; and that wheras his Disciples would haue hindred them from him ( even upon the same ground , without doubt , upon which these men excludes them ) he being therewith displeased , bids suffer them to come unto him , for that of such is the Kingdom of heaven ; and takes them in his armes and blesseth them : and to our collection hence , they answer ; first , that He saith not , that Infants are of the Kingdom of heaven , that is , obeyers of the Gospell ; but that they that will enter into the Kingdom of heaven , must become as little children , for of such , &c. And that his mayn end was to declare the innocent estate of Infants , and to teach all to be like unto them by conversion : and withall , that Christ baptized them not : and lastly , that his blessings are manifold to Infants in their creation , life , and bodily benefits . DEFENCE . LET us examine the particulars : First , they presume , but cannot proue , that onely such are of the Kingdom of heaven , as obey the Gospell . Shall Infants ( which they affirm else-where ) be glorified in the Kingdom of heaven , and yet are they not of it ? There are not two Kingdoms of heaven ; but one , begun in grace , and perfected in glory . Secondly , they to make more colourable their erroneous construction of the Evangelists words , and Christs work about those Infants , cite for Math. 19 , and the like places , Math. 18 ; that so the slight Readers , such as their Disciples are , might conceiv that Christ had no other meaning in the other places by us alledged , then in that by them ; and that he spake not of a child personally , but in condition , as David was , Ps. 131. Wheras in that place , Christs meaning was to reprov the ambitious contentions amongst his Disciples , by the contrary disposition in a childe , which he therfore took , and set in the midst of them ; but in the other , his purpose was to shew what interest the children of the Church had in him , and in his blessing , for which they were brought unto him by their parents . Against these depravers , both of the word , and work of God , I thus argue . That which the parents , which brought their infants desired , that the Lord did for them : But it is plain , that their desire in bringing them was , that he might pray for them , and blesse them , as the Scriptures expresly teach he did . But , say they , he baptized them not . True ; for hee baptized none , though actuall beleevers . It sufficeth , that he did that by which he declared that they had right in him , and in his blessing , and that it was his will they should come unto him . Let them shew a way , how they can now come to Christ , saue by Baptism ? Or how they can haue right in his blessing , and yet haue no right in his bloud-shed , and in Baptism , for the signifying and applying it ? They add , that Christ healed the sick , and gaue bodily blessings of life , growth in stature , and the like . But as it is meerly , and vainly imagined , that these children were brought for the healing of any bodily diseases : so are we taught expresly by the Holy Ghost , that Christs blessing them was not for bodily benefits , but because , the Kingdom of heaven was of such : that is , appertained to them , and to such as they were . ADVERSARIES . TO our next Argument , taken from the circumcision of Abrahams infants , they answer : First , there is no commandment for baptizing of Infants now , as there was for circumcising them then : Secondly , that that commandement was for males onely , children , or servants , though unbeleevers : Thirdly , that circumcision was to be performed onely on the eight day : so as there is no proportion between Circumcision and Baptism . DEFENCE . HEE that pleaseth to reade the former passages between them and us , which they haue in their hands , but answer not , shall see how weightlesse this exception is ; and how we haue proved against them , that the Church of Israel , and ours , is one in substance ; the covenant the same which God made with them in Christ to come , and with us in Christ come in the flesh : and withall , how our Baptism succeeds their Circumcision . They trifle in objecting the Legall difference of daies , and sexes , which the Scriptures expresly teach to bee abolished . Are not Pastors now the Lords Ministers , as the Levites were of old , and their successors therein : and yet are they not tyed to any certain Tribe , as they were ? Is not our Lords Supper the same in effect with their Passeover ? Both the one and the other , the mysticall eating of the Lamb of God : Which yet is not tyed to any certain day or month , as was the former . Lastly , they err grievously in saying , that unbeleeving servant , and children were commanded to be circumcised . The Lord would haue all the wicked cut off from his people : and would he haue unbeleevers received unto them ? Hath God entred Covenant with unbeleevers to be their God , as he hath done with all to whom Circumcision appertained ? Was it the seal of the righteousnesse of faith ; and yet due to the faithlesse ? Rather then these Adversaries will admit the seed of the faithfull to be of Gods people now , they will haue very Infidels and Vnbeleevers of old , to haue been of his peculiar ones . If their heresie were detestable , who made the God of the Law worse then the God of the Gospell ; surely , theirs is not light , nor small , who thus contumeliously speak of him in his people , which he took neer unto himselfe , and whose God he became ; and of that speciall Ordinance , by which he differenced them from the prophane world , as holy unto him ; in which they interest the unbeleevers , and unholy . ADVERSARIES . NOW followeth our main foundation , that as the infants of Abraham , and of the Israelites his posterity , were taken into the Church-covenant , or covenant of life and salvation , as they call it ( and rightly in a true sense ) with their parents , and circumcised : so are the infants of the faithfull now , and to receiv accordingly the seal of Baptism : to which they say , and proue ( as they say ) that neither Circumcision was , nor Baptism is a seal of the Covenant of salvation , but the spirit of promise which is ever the same . DEFENCE . THeir dispute from the seal of the Spirit , to proue that there is no other seal , is as if a man should deny all teaching , direction , and comfort by the Word and Sacraments ; because the Spirit teacheth , directeth and comforteth the faithfull . This point I haue else-where proved at large against them ; neither are they either able , or doe they goe about to giue any shew of answer ; and yet , without modesty , they repeat their former bare sayings , fully answered , and refuted . Where the Apostle , 2 Cor. 1 , and Eph. 1 , & 4 , speaks of the seal of the spirit , means he , that the Spirit makes a materiall print in the soule , as a seal doth in Wax ? Or not this onely , that it helps to confirm , and comfort a Christian inwardly in the loue of God , and hope of salvation ? And are not the Sacraments outward helps of comfort and confirmation of a beleevers heart in the same loue of God , and hope of glory ? Vpon the same ground , that the Apostle cals it a seal inwardly , we call them seals outwardly . ADVERSARIES . TO shew that the Covenant in question was the Covenant of the Law , and old Testament , and not the covenant of salvation : and so Circumcision the seal thereof , and not the sign and seal of life and salvation ; they discourse at large upon Gal. 4 , and of the two seeds of Aoraham , the one after the flesh , unto which the covenant appertained , whereunto circumcision was annexed . DEFENCE . FIrst , they err greatly , in denying the very Covenant of the Law to haue been the Covenant of life and salvation . For the commandement was ordained to life . And the man that doth the workes of the Law shall liue in them . And if the Law promise not life and salvation , then neither doth it threaten death and condemnation . The Covenant then is of the same things , but the condition divers : The Law exacting perfect obedience of , and by our selvs : the Gospell requiring true faith , and repentance , which it also worketh in the elect . Secondly , it is most untrue , that Circumcision was the sign or seal of the old Testament , or Law , taking it properly , as they doe . The Apostle expresly cals it , the seal of the righteousnesse of faith , opposed to the righteousnesse of works , or of the Law ; of which more hereafter : else where shewing , that the same Law was given foure hundred and thirty years after the covenant or promise to Abraham and his seed , confirmed before in Christ , through the peaching of the Gospel , that they which are of faith might be blessed with faithfull Abraham . How preposterous are these mens waies , who will haue the seal so long before the Covenant ? Thirdly , Circumcision was the seal of that Covenant , by which Abraham , and his posterity became the Lords peculiar people , seperated from all the uncircumcised heathen unto him for his inheritance , and therein blessed : For blessed is the nation , whereof the Lord is God , the people that he hath chosen for a possession to himself ; and blessed is the people , whose God is Iehouah . Now will these gainsaying spirits have men blessed by the law whether God will , or no ? Saith not the scripture , that by the law all are accursed ? and that as many , as are of the works of the law are accursed ; as being unable to keep it ? The Covenant then by which Israel became Gods people , and therein blessed , of which Circumcision was a sign , and seal , was not the Covenant of the law , but of the gospell , and so of grace , and salvation by grace . Lastly , how wyde , and wilde are they in expounding the allegory of Abrahams two sons ? Gal. 4 makeing Abrahams children after the flesh , the Infants of the faithfull : never considering the Apostles generall scope , unto which the particulars are to be applyed . Doth he in that place deal against the Infants of the Galatians , or against the men of yeares , though children in knowledg ? who had begun in the spirit , but would be made perfit in the flesh : that is , would be justified by the law , specially by circumcision in the flesh : by which they made Christ of none effect and fell from grace . Were they Infants to whom he saith , Tel mee , ye that desire to be under the law &c. So where he addeth He that is born after the flesh persequutes him , that is born after the spirit , doth he mean that Infants are persequuters ? Or is not his meaning plain , that such as glory in the flesh , and in circumcision and other fleshly prerogatives , and so despise the free promise of grace in Christ , and them that rest under it ( as Ismael did both in truth of person , and type of others ) are these persequuters , at all times , to be cast out , with Ismael ; as having no right to the inheritance of grace or glory . Are the Infants of beleevers to be cast out for their persequutions ? Out of what , I marvail , and for what persequutions ? These men in opening this Allegory , or Parable verify that of the Wise-man , As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard , so is a Parable in the mouth of fooles . That the Covenant Gen. 17. whereof circumcision was a sign , was the same , which we haue now in the Gospell , we haue not onely said , as they say we haue done ; but proved by so clear arguments , as that , had they onely set them down , there had needed no further confirmation of them , notwithstanding any thing that they could haue excepted , But they haue cunningly passed them by in silence , as if no such thing were in the book ; and doe onely repeat over , and again , the same things with great irksomnes , specially to those , that haue formerly confuted them . ADVERSARIES . BVT they tell us , that the Covenant under the Gospell is a new and better Covenant then the old , &c. DEFENCE . WE grant it : but affirm withall , that the Covenant with Abraham was not the Covenant of the law , or old testament , as they mean. The Covenant with Abraham was confirmed of God in Christ , that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles thorow Iesus Christ. The Covenant of the Law , or old Testament was 400 and thirty years after , and was added for transgression til the seed should come , to whom the promise was made : that is , to detect and manifest mens sins , and cursed state thereby ; that so they might fly the more earnestly to the promise of Christ ( the blessed and blessing Seed ) made formerly to Abraham . Neither do the Scripture in this matter ever oppose Abraham and Christ ; but Moses and Christ. The Law was given by Moses ; but grace and truth by Iesus Christ. So Hebr. 10 , the Law of Moses , and Covenant of the Son of God , are opposed : and Moses made the Mediator of the old testament , and Covenant , established in the blood of bulls and goats : and Christ the mediator of the new by his own blood . And I would know of these men where the law is ever called the law of Abraham , as it is every where , the law of Moses : which law or old testament ( opposed to the new ) was written and engraven in Tables of stone , and had therefore , not Abraham , but Moses the mediator of it . Lastly , for the ceremoniall part of the Law , old Testament , or Covenant , the Authour to the Hebrews makes it plain , that it was received under the Leviticall Priesthood , having a worldly sanctuary and ordinances , and divers washings for the purifying of the flesh , but not of the conscience from dead workes : whereas by the promise and Covenant to Abraham , and his seed , the blessing of justification came , both upon the Iews in their time , and Gentiles in theirs , through Christ Iesus , in whom it was confirmed . In adding , that the Old taught that Christ was not come in the flesh , nor into their hearts at their Circumcision : They make the Lords Covenant negatiue , as teaching what is not , and not what is . A Covenant is a promise upon condition ; and a Testament , or Will , that , in which Legacies are given . But by this doctrine , here should be nothing either given or promised . It is , besides , very ungodlily said , that Abraham , ( in whom principally we are to consider both of the Covenant , and seal thereof Circumcision ) had not Christ in his heart , when he was circumcised . Both Moses in Abrahams historie , and the Apostles , who well understood it , affirm the contrary , and that he was justified in uncircumcision , by beleeving in Christ : In which respect he is called the father of them that beleev , not onely circumcised , but uncircumcised also . Haue his children that which he for substance had not ; even in that wherein he was their father ? This thing they grant in the very next page ; and that Abraham had the covenant of grace promised him , by which promise he had salvation in the Messiah to come ▪ and therein , that the Covenant made with Abraham , whereof Circumcision was a seal , was the Covenant of the Gospell , and the same with ours now . It is strange that these men , who so magnifie Baptism , as they will haue men made Christians by it ; should so vilifie Circumcision , as to make it of right to appertain to godlesse and wicked men : for such were and are all , at all times , since Adam sinned , that had , and and haue not Christ in their hearts . Was it not an holy Ordinance of God ? and therfore not to be prostituted to the unholy , and unpure , as all unbeleevers ; that is , all into whose hearts Christ is not come , are : and unto whom nothing is pure or holy . Could it be to any a sign that God was their God ; a seal of the righteousnesse of faith ; a pledg of Gods protection ; and note of distinction between Gods people and others : And yet belong to such as were wholly without Christ , and so without God in the world ? When any of the Heathens became Proselytes , they chose God to be their God , came to trust under the wings of the Lord God of Israel , and separated themselvs from Idolaters to the Law of God : and of all this , they made solemn profession by Circumcision : which they must either do without faith , and so not please God therein ( which is absurd to say they did , which did it , lawfully : ) or else with faith , by which Christ , though not come in the flesh ▪ was come into their hearts . Of the Ceremonies of Moses , and so of Circumcision which Moses took of the fathers into the body of the Ceremoniall Law ; and of their divers considerations , I haue elsewhere ; written at large , and doe refer the Reader thither for satisfaction in that point . That none of the Church of Israel ( called by them affectedly Abrahams seed in the flesh ) had the Ordinances of the new Covenant , is not true . They had Iohns Baptism , which even now these men avowed as the Baptism of the new Testament ; and Christs also , who baptized more Disciples then Iohn ; and with them , the twelv had the Lords Supper also , and all these , whilst the Iewish Church and Ordinances stood in their full strength . It is true , that Iohns was not in the Kingdom of God , as Christ speaks , Math. 11 , that in the state of the Church and Ordinances dispensed under Christ glorified : Otherwise , the Iews had the Kingdom of heaven , which else could no● haue been taken from them and given to others : neither could Christ haue been , as he was , the King of Sion . So the Patriarks received not the promise , that is , Christ come in the flesh ; to which purpose the Apostle saith , Before faith came , &c. Shall we therfore say , that before Christs comming in the flesh none had true faith to salvation ; or that true beleevers received not Christ , though to come , as we now receiv Christ come in the flesh ? They , Christ promised and prefigured , by the Word and Ordinances then : we , Christ manifested and remembred by the Word and Ordinances now ; properly called the New Testament , as founded in the actuall death of the Testator . ADVERSARIES . HEre follows an exception against me in particular : which is , that by the old Covenant mentioned Ier. 31 , & Hebr. S ▪ is not meant , as I affirm , that which was made on mount Sinai , Exod. 19 , but the Covenant mentioned , Exod. 3. v. 6 , &c. Their reason is , for that God made that Covenant with them , when hee took them by the hand to bring them out of Aegipt , which is mentioned Exod. 3 , and not Exod. 19. For then , say they , did God appear to Moses , and commanded him to take them by the hand , and lead them out of Aegipt , where the Covenant is mentioned , I am the God of thy fathers , Abraham , &c. DEFENCE . FIrst , to let passe , that though they bid , mark the words , yet they cite them not : I answer , that these words , in that day , as the Text hath it , cannot be restrained to that particular day when God appeared to Moses ; seeing the Lord did not that particular day take them by the hand to bring them out , but divers daies after , as is expresly affirmed , ch . 12. 51 , Psal. 77. 12 , & 105 , 27. 43. By that day therfore is not meant , any particular day , but indefinitely the time of their transporting out of Aegipt into Canaan : as , elsewhere , by the day of their birth , is meant the whole time of their fore-going misery . So , many hundred times , in the Scriptures , by the day , or that day , is meant indefinitely the time in which a thing happeneth , or is done . Besides , where the Prophet speaks of the day in which God took them by the hand ; they speak of the day in which God appeared unto Moses , and commanded him to take them by the hand ; which was , whilst he was in the land of Midian . God indeed then shewed his will to Moses , but stretched not out his hand for their deliverance , till many daies after . They say further , that Exod. 3 , the Covenant is mentioned , I am the God thy father Abraham &c. But is every mentioning of a Covenant , the making of it ? And did God make a Covenant with , and become the God of Abraham , Isaak , and Iakob , at that time ? That is , when they were now dead divers hundred years before . What can be more plain , then that the Lord doth not there make a new : but remembers the old Covenant made before with Abraham , &c. of which the bringing his posterity out of Aegipt into the promised land , was an appurtenance ? God promised to be Abrahams God , and the God of his Seed , that is , all-sufficient for the good things , not onely of this world , but also of the world to come , as Christ expounds his fathers words , Math. 22. 32. 33 , and so gaue them accordingly the land of Canaan , as a store-house of earthly good things ; and figure of heavenly . These men therfore , in this place , unskilfully transform the fulfilling of an old promise into the making of a new . Which they also confesse , in effect , in the very same place , in saying , that the promise ( that is , the Covenant on Gods part ) was made to Abraham , Gen. 17. The word everlasting Gen. 17. I urge not further to proue the Covenant with Abraham perpetuall ; then as the nature of the same Covenant carries it . It was that by which God became Abrahams God ; and more he is , or can be to none : and that which Christ himselfe extends to the very resurection of the bodies of Abraham &c. whos 's God the Lord was , and is . Two reasons I will annex to justifie mine exposition of the Prophet Ieremy , and Apostle after him ; and to proue that by the old Covenant , they meant the Covenant of the Law given on mount Syna . The former from the opposition , between the old and new Covenant , expresly made in the generall ; and particularly insinuated in these words , I will write my Law in their hearts , and will forgiue their iniquity , and remember their sins no more : which was , not according to , but most unlike to the old Covenant , or Law given on mount Syna , written in Tables of stone , and by which sin , and transgression was not forgiven , but quickned and encreased . A second reason is , for that the old , and first Covenant ( opposed to that in Christ ) had ordinances of divine worship ; and a worldly Sanctuary , or Tabernacle , wherein was the Table , and Candlestick , &c. which no man that beleevs the Bible , can make doubt to be meant of the Law , and Covenant given on mount Syna ▪ to and by Moses . By the old Covenant is meant , that of the Law by Moses on mount Sina , unto which the other is opposed . Their exception , that Abrahams children of 8 ▪ daies old could make no covenant , nor agreement , is too childish to exclude them from it : and that , by which they should haue been in no covenant at all with the Lord , nor hee with them ; new , nor old ; Legall , nor Evangelicall : for they could make none . It is not required , that every one comprehended in a Covenant , should actually stipulate , or promise . Witnesse the Covenant with Noah , in which , both all his seed , and every living creature , both foule and cattell , were included . It was therefore sufficient to bring Abrahams seed into the Lords Covenant , that God in grace made , and Abraham by faith received , the promise that he would be his God and theirs . That every faithfull man and his seed , is ( as ) Abraham and his seed , the Scripture proue , in teaching , that every beleever is of the faith of Abraham , and walks in his steps . For if Abraham did by faith receiv the promise , that God would be his God , and the God of his seed , without which , no promise had belonged unto them : then , where the same faith is for substance , there is the same promise for substance to every beleever ; though a son of Abraham as following his example ▪ yet as Abraham himselfe in beleeving as hee did . And this is most manifest , in that by this very covenant God was not onely the God of Abraham , and his seed Isaak ; but of Isaak , and his seed Iakob ; and of Iakob , and his seed the Patriarks , and so successiuely : not by fleshly descent of the children from their parents ( as they absurdly cavill ) but by spirituall and divine promise of grace : which they ungraciously despise for their children , because they cannot be doing something to God again ▪ by their free-will , to require him withall . Next comes to be examined that notable place , Rom. 4. 11. Abraham received the sign of Circumcision , the seal of the righteousnesse of the faith which he had being uncircumcised , that he might be the father of all that beleev ▪ though uncircumcised , that righteousnesse might be imputed to them also . ADVERSARIES . THeir evasion is , that by faith here , is not meant faith in the Messiah , by which he was , and we are justified : but , say they , Circumcision sealed up Abrahams fatherhood of the faithfull ; that is , was a seal of his faith in beleeving God , that he should be the father of many Nations . DEFENCE . AND this faith , say we , was the faith of the Gospell , and faith in the Messiah , which the Apostle expresly saith , was imputed to him for righteousnesse , and by which he was justified ; as is plain , from v. 17 , I haue made thee a father of many Nations , compared with v. 22 , where he infers therupon , even upon that faith , And therfore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse : Which also , that it was the same in substance with ours now , the words following manifest . Now it was not written for his sake alone , that it was imputed to him ; but to us also , to whom it shall be imputed , if we beleev in him that raised up Iesus our Lord from the dead , who was delivered for our sins &c. v. 23. 24. 25. This will yet the more clearly appear , if we consider what is meant by these promises , I haue made thee a father of many Nations , and so shall thy seed be , recited by the Apostle for the purpose in hand : In these words , I haue made thee a father of many Nations , he opposeth many Nations to that one Nation of the Iews . Of these many Nations , hee was the father , even of all that beleev , though uncircumcised , v. 11. And how a father ? By way of example , that , as hee was justified by faith in the promise of God , and of the promised seed Christ , even when he was uncircumcised : So they , beleeving the same promise of God in Christ , now come of him , though uncircumcised , should in like manner , be justified as he was . Which is yet further confirmed , where it is said , that he is the father of all them , though not of the circumcision , that walk in the steps of the faith of Abraham , which he had yet being uncircumcised . Whence I gather , that if we be justified by the same faith that Abraham was justified by , and that he was justified by faith in that promise ▪ that then that promise was made of , and in the Messiah Christ , the blessed and blessing Seed : as it is said : So shall thy seed be : and Abraham beleeved , and he counted it to him for righteousnesse : And again , In thee shall all Nations , or families of the earth be blessed . Now of this faith the Apostle here speaks , and of it he testifies circumcision to haue been a seal to Abraham . It cannot be denyed , but that the Apostle in this whole discourse , speaks of faith to justification ; proving partly , by the example of Abraham , and partly by the testimony of David , that we are justified by the faith of Christ , and not by the works of the Law. And to what end , or with what order should hee thrust in an impertinent discourse of any other faith ? To affirm this , is no better then to defame the Holy Ghost with equivocating . Or to what purpose should he mention the sign of Circumcision , as a seal of faith , if not of that faith , of which he treats ? For wheras it might be objected , that if Abraham were justified by beleeving before he was circumcised , as is said , v. 3. 9. 10 , then what needed hee after to haue been circumcised ? The Apostle answers , v. 11 , that hee received the sign of circumcision , as a seal of the righteousnesse of faith vvhich he had yet being uncircumcised , which faith v. 9 , vvas reckoned to him for righteousnesse : that by it the covenant of grace between God & him might be confirmed , as covenants among men formerly agreed upon are , by the seals thereunto annexed . Lastly , who endued with common sense , and modesty can deny , that by the righteousnesse of faith , wherof Circumcision was a seal , is meant the righteousnes which is by faith , as v. 3 , Abraham beleeved God , and it vvas imputed to him for righteousnesse , and v. 9 , faith vvas reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse : which righteousnesse of faith , in this whole discourse , he opposeth to the righteousnesse of works by the Law , as is expresly to be seen , v. 3. 14. 15. 16. But now what say our Adversaries to these things ? as men in a maze , and not knowing how to finde the way out , goe sometimes backward , sometimes forward , and sometimes leap unorderly from one place to another : so doe they in expounding this Scripture . In their out-leaps about Abrahams fleshly children , I shall not need heere to follow them . Where , after , they say , that Circumcision was a seal of Abrahams faith in beleeving God that he should be the father of many Nations , and that this was imputed to him for righteousnesse ; they say as much as we do , or desire they should . But where they say , in the very same place , that hee received not circumcision to seal up his faith in the Messiah , they goe backward most dangerously , to bring in a faith to justification , imputed for righteousnesse , which yet is not in the Messiah . Was righteousnesse ever , or is it imputed to any for justification , but by faith in Christ , then promised , now exhibited ? The reason insinuated by them is a pleasant one ; namely , for that Abraham had faith in the Messiah 24 years before he was circumcised . Whereas on the contrary , it could not haue been a seal of such faith , except hee had had the faith before , whether longer or lesser time , it matters not , but is , as it pleaseth him who bestow●th both the one and other . Signes and Seals are not to be set to blankes , neither doe they make things that were not before , to be ? but serv onely to confirm things that are . These things thus cleared , the Reader must be requested , not to measure our arguments from Abraham and Isaaks circumcision , to the Baptism of Infants , by the crooked line which these men draw between them : but by the right rule of sound reason , applyed as followeth in three particulars . First , that the Covenant unto which Circumcision was annexed , was the Covenant of the Gospell , and not of the Law and old Testement , as they take it . For then it could not haue been to Abraham the seal of the righteousnesse of faith , any way : but of unrighteousnesse and condemnation every way : for righteousnes is not by the Law , which worketh wrath , and by which sin revives , and becomes exceeding sinfull . And surely it is more then strange , that any beleeving the Scriptures , should beleev that the Lords Covenant made with Abraham , and so with Israel in him , by which he took them to be his peculiar people , from among all other peoples , because hee loved their father and them ; by which they were a blessed Nation , having Iehovah for their God ; in remembring of which covenant with Abraham &c. he so often shewed them mercy , and did them good ; and in time , gaue his Son Christ to saue them from their enemies : and lastly , by which Covenant they shall again be called when the fulnesse of the Gentiles is come in : and so all Israel shall be saved , as it is written , There shall come out of Syon a Deliverer , and shall turn away ungodlinesse from Iakob . For this is my Covenant unto them when I shall take away their sins . As concerning the Gospell they are enemies for the ( Gentiles ) sake : but as concerning the election , they are beloved for the fathers sake : for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance : that this covenant of loue and mercy , making them blessed which are taken into it , and procuring the giving of Christ , and of salvation , should be the covenant of the old Testament and Law : Of the Law , I say , and old Testament , which is the ministery of death ; the letter that killeth : which worketh wrath , was added for transgression ; by which sin reviveth , and all die , and are accursed . What is this else but to bring the currant of gracious mercy , into a channell of severe justice , and to curse where God blesseth , as Balaam purposed to haue done ? Secondly , we conclude hence , that the Church of the Iews , and Church now is one in substance , though diversly ordered : one Uineyard ( in which there are both grown trees , and yong plants ; ) one Kingdom which was taken from them , and given to us ; the branches of one oliue tree , holy in the same holy root Abraham , from which most of them were broken off for unbelief , and we by faith planted in their place ; one body , and therefore having Infants in it now , as then , and the same therefore to be baptized ( there being also one Baptism , as one body ) as they were circumcised of old : Baptism ( as elsewhere I haue proved at large , to their silencing in that point ) comming in the place of Circumcision . Thirdly , that all their disputes against Infants Baptism , because they cannot manifest faith and repentance , are but the same quarrels which might haue been picked of old against Infants Circumcision . That there was something in Abrahams circumcision extraordinary , is true : for he first received it for his posterity ; and for the Proselytes with them , which joyned themselvs to the Lord : so was there also in his faith , as he was the father ( by example ) to all that should beleev after him . Their prophane assertion , that faith was required of none ( to wit men of years ) for circumcision , I haue formerly disproved . How can it come into the hearts of reasonable men , that the Lord in whose eies the prayers , sacrifices , and all other services of ungodly men were so abominable , should like of their circumcision ? Lastly , for Abrahams children of the flesh ( according to their misunderstanding of them ) they were by nature children of wrath as well as others , and had thereby no more right to circumsion , then the Infants of Sodom . It was of grace , and not of nature , that they were within Gods Covenant . Of Gal. 3. and Rom. 9. we haue spoken at large formerly , and of their misconstructions of the Apostles meaning . Lastly , we neither run , as they say , nor goe to the old Testament , Law , or Moses for the baptizing of Infants ; but to the Covenant of the Gospell solemnly made with our father Abraham long before the Law was given , the old Testament established , or Moses born . Their discourse about Rome is vain , except they can proue that the outward baptism there administred ( though unlawfully ) is not to be reteyned by such , as unto whom the Lord afterward vouchsafeth the inward baptism of his spirit ; and so answer our Reasons to the contrary , which they haue , and haue had so long time in their hands . These things thus cleared , it remaines we come in the next & last place to examine their defence of that their own unhallowed baptism in use amongst them : formerly proved by me a mere nullity by their grounds , and practise set together . Their ground is , that baptism unlawfully ministred is no baptism , their practise , that he who ministring his gift ( poorely as their manner is ) doth convert ( in truth pervert ) another : may also baptize him without any speciall calling . For foundation of my proofs I laid down these two Rules . 1. There is no lawfull baptism , but by him that hath a lawfull calling to baptize . 1. Thess. 4. 11. Heb. 5. 4. 5. And unto this they assent . 2. Onely he hath a lawfull ordinary calling to baptize ( and extraordinary they challeng not ) who is called therto by the Church . This their first rebaptizer Mr. Smith had not , neyther haue they , that now administer baptism amongst them ; neither doe they account , that more is requisite for power , and right to baptize , then a personall gift of teaching , and making thereby one of their Proselites , and supposed converts . Whereupon it follows , that they themselvs being baptized by such , as want a lawfull calling , are not lawfully baptized ; and so by the verdict of their own quest , unbaptized persons . Their defence they begin with the perverting both of my words , and meaning , very unhonestly , in setting down the state of the question ; which yet seems not strang unto me , considering their licentious dealing in like sort , with the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures . They frame the question ; whether any but Pastors or Elders may baptize ? and my charge upon them ; that they are unbaptized , because , they want Pastors . But where haue I so spoken ? or how gather they that to haue been my meaning ? had it so been , why could I not as easily haue said , that none but Pastors ( for of baptism by others Elders which labour not in the word and doctrine , we approve not ) may lawfully baptize ; as , that none but such as are lawfully called by the Church may baptize ? which are my words . My meaning was not to deny , that a Church wanting Pastors may appoint a member able to teach ( though out of office ) to baptize : for which much may be said , and hath been by some so minded . Which though I doe not simply approve of ; yet neyther did , neither had I occasion ro deal thereagainst , but onely against the wilde course of these All-alikes ; of whom any that can wrest a few Scriptures ( intended of men of yeares onely ) against the baptizing of Infants , to the corrupting of some simple man , or woman , thinks himself another Iohn Baptist , as their practise and profession manifests . Now whether they haue thus altered my words , and perverted my meaning out of bold rashnes , as being more hasty to answer , then to understand their adversarie ; or out of cunning for their advantage , the Lord and themselvs bee Iudges . Onely this any may see , and I shall make appeare , that the most , and most colourable of their Arguments are against their misconceaved , and not mine intended sense : which gives occasion to suspect , that they haue rather been cunning , then carelesse in the thing . ADVERSARIES . LET us come to the particulars : and first to their first and main ground , and foundation of their course which is , that members , and Churches of Christ are made both by faith , and baptism , and not by the one onely . DEFENCE . THIS their foundation in respect of baptism is sandy : seeing it servs but to signifie , and confirm what was before ; but makes nothing to be that was not . The Scriptures ( being many ) cited by them are partly impertinent , and partly against them , some of them expresly , and the rest truely . Some of them indeed speak of being baptized into Christ , and into his death , and into one body with him , and make baptism a foundation : but mean not 〈◊〉 to shew , that men are made Christian soules by baptism , as ignorant persons think and speak ; but onely that they are confirmed , and furthered thereby in that which they were before . Some of the places joyn with baptism the Lords Supper , others the laying on of hands ( which yet rather is meant of the doctrine , then ministration of those things ) . Now doe they conceaue , that such as were no true Christians before , are in part made Christians by the Lords Supper , and laying on of hands ? When the Scriptures affirm any thing of an ordinance , they must be interpreted according to the nature of the ordimance . As where Christ saith of the bread , This is my body ; or of the rock , And the rock was Christ : or the Apostle here , that we are baptized into Christ , and draw neer unto Christ by baptism , and the like ; we must understand the speaches as sacramentall , so far as they are applied to ordinances ; that is , as intending those things , for signes , and seales , and means of confirmation ; and not otherwise . Others of the Scriptures brought by them are so plainly against them , as it is marvail that in setting them down , they thought not of the Lords answer to the evill servant Luke 19. 22. For example , Math. 28. 19. Go teach , or as they well turn it , make all nations disciples baptizing them &c. The Apostles then were first to make , to wit , by their teaching , disciples , that is Christians ; and after to baptize them . Is it not the Scriptures constant voice , and these mens plea ( true in it self , but to a wrong end ) that men must first beleeue , and repent , and upon manifestation thereof , be baptized ? Are not they that beleev , and repent Christians with them ? Otherwise , How doe they baptize them ? But thus it is with men in all sects , that are lead by passion , and appetite , more then reason : they doatupon some one thing truly or apparantly good : and labor aboue measure , to magnifie it , esteeming all things without it , as nothing . Thus these men esteem of baptism , others of Church government , others of seperation , others of imposition of hands by Bishops ; And so , according as men haue advantage by particulars , or suffer for them , or are otherwise prejudiced towards them , they set high valuation upon them . But as grace teacheth us to acknowledg better things in Christians then any outward ordinances ; so must wisdom warn us not to ascribe too much to any one , as fond folks use to doe to the person , or thing which they affect . Math. 18. 20 , is against them . To be gathered together in Christs name there , presupposes a Church state . So is Io● . 4. 1. Christ made and baptized disciples : they were made disciples by preaching , and after baptized . Ioh. 3. 5 , speaks of regeneration by the spirit compared in that place to water , as elswhere to fire for its property in purifying . And admit , it speak of the ordinance of baptism : yet must it follow regeneration , as a means of confirmation . As therefore Christians are not made by the ordinance of baptism ; so much lesse are Churches . This I haue elswhere proved against them by many firm Arguments : to which seeing they neither giue answer , nor shew thereof : ( though this be a main matter in question between them and us ) what should I say more to them ? These they may answer , if they be able , as I am sure they are not : nor , I think , will ever goe about it . Onely , I here add this one thing . If members , and Churches be made by Baptism , I demand , when I. M. alone baptiseth one of his converts alone , what Church , or member of what Church is here made ? And if one alone may receiv or make members of the Church , why not also cast them out , and excommunicate them without the Churches presence or privity ? Such is the confused course of these men . Here they cite sundry Scriptures , but proving onely that which we willingly grant : viz. that men and women converted from Heathenism , and Iudaism , to the faith of Christ , and so to be added to the Church , and being before unbaptised , were to be baptized . But how proues this , that they were made either Churches or Christians by Baptism ? When any of the Heathens became Iews , that is , embraced the Iewish Religion , and separated themselvs from the other Idolaters of the land to the Law of God , and came to put their trust under the wings of the God Israel , and were to be circumcised : did their Circumcision make them such ? Or did it not onely , declare and confirm that state of grace , in and unto which God had called them ? Neither yet could the things forementioned be performed by their infants : and yet were they made partakers of Circumcision with them . ADVERSARIES . BVT minde here a futher matter . They say , The Church at Ierusalem was the first Church of Christ ; and by faith , and Baptism made a Church : and in the next words , that the twelue were so made also . DEFENCE . IF the Church at Ierusalem were the first Church of Christ ( as in a sense it may be so called ) I would know how the Baptism of Christ before that time , and of Iohns before Christs ( having also joyned with them faith in the baptized ) made Churches ? Were any made before the first ? Or what , and which were the Churches which they so made , and gathered ? Both the one , and other living , and dying members of the Iewish Church . I add , considering how it is said of Iohn , that Ierusalem and all Iudea , and the region round about Iordan were baptized of him , confessing their sinnes : and of Christ , that he made and baptized moe Disciples then Iohn ; it is very evident , that thousands , afterwards made members of the Churches in Ierusalem , Iudea , Samaria , and Galilee , were baptized long before , by Iohn and Christ : and were made members of the Church , in our sense , long after their Baptism . Here then we see Baptism administred , and yet no Church made : and again , Churches made , and yet many the members thereof , not then , but long before baptized . We grant ( as they say ) that Rome is that Aegipt , Sodom and Babylon , in mysterie , mentioned in the Revelation : but deny ( which they adjoyn ) as being both untrue and uncharitable , that all in that Church are in Gods account as the worst pagans , &c. God hath his people ( considered in their persons ) in Babylon , unto whom he saith , Come out of her my people , &c. being held captiue there , by her craft and cruelty . Neither is Babylon called an habitation of Divels , for that the devill possesseth men ; but to shew its desolation after the day of the fall thereof : the Evangelist in that speech , alluding to the forms of speech used by the Prophets before against Babylon Civill , in regard of her utter ruin , and desolation shortly to follow . Neither is the Baptism in Rome , a Babylonish , or Aegyptian washing , as they calumniate ; no more then the doctrine of Baptism , in the name of the Trinity is a Babylonish doctrine ; but it is as a vessell of the Lords house , though prophaned there . Much lesse can that vitupery agree to the Church of England , where the faith is sound for justification and salvation , and effectuall for obtaining the same in those that truely professe it . The Circumcision of Gods people ( though too much infected with their sinns ) in Aegipt , and Babylon , were no● Aegyptian and Babylonish ; no more is the Baptism in Aegypt and Babylon spirituall : specially in regard of Gods people there ; as not a few also shew themselvs to be by comming out thence at the Lords call : though some more slowly then other ; as of old they did out of Babylon Civill , as Esra , and Nehemiah testifie . That the everlasting Gospell commands beleevers to be baptized ; to wit , if unbaptized before , we grant : but that men become an habitation of God by his spirit , and water ; is as if they said ; water dwels in men , as the spirit of God doth ? It is hard to say , whether Papists bread , or these mens water , be made the greater Idoll . Neither doe we in retaining the Baptism received in Rome , take a corner stone out of Babylon , either for foundation , or wall , but bring thence a vessell of the Lords house there captived with the Lords people . I know not but that the very circumcision of the Shechimites might haue been retained , if any of the males had survived and embraced the truth of religion : which yet was far from being lawfully administred . Lastly , though all were true which they say for anabaptizing in the generall ; yet were their particular practise not justified thereby , nor our exception cleared , being against their manner ( and the same singular , from all other of their Sect , in all places ) of baptizing , by persons uncalled thereunto , either by God immediately , or mediately by the Church , ●● or otherwise then by their own particular and personall motion . To their objection arising from the supposed proportion between Baptism , and the Ministery ; and to their Demand , Why I cast away my Popish Priesthood , and retain my Popish washing for my Christianity ( as they please to speak ) I haue answered elsewhere at large : neither haue they been able , to this day , or now are , to say against mine answer any thing at all , either true , or colourable : and yet neither haue they the humility to suffer themselvs to be taught better ; nor the modesty to hold their tongues in the matter : but doe irksomely demand a new the things of old answered . For the present , I will onely note these three differences . First , it is absurdly said , that a man is made a Christian by his Baptism , as he is made a Minister by his outward calling . He that is not a Christian before he be baptized , becomes not one thereby : But by the outward calling of the Church , hee that was no Minister before , become such properly and imediatly . Secondly , a man is to be baptized but once : and God adding to the outward washing with water that which is inward , and by his spirit , sanctifies the former , and covers many faylings in the manner of administring it : but a man may on the contrary , upon occasion , be called divers times to a Ministery , in divers Churches , one after another . Thirdly , the Ministery is the Churches , and depends upon it as the adjunct upon the subject , so as if the Church dissolue , the Ministerie ceaseth : which the same Church also that giues it , may take away , and make him that was a Minister no Minister : Besides , that in the mean while his Ministery is bounded within the precincts of that Church wherof he is an officer . But in the ordinance of Baptism the case is clean otherwise . For neither can the Church which hath given it , take it from him ; neither ceaseth he to remain a baptized person , though alone , and without either Church , or other Christian in the world with him ; neither is he in any Church where he comes , to bee barred from the priviledges of his Baptism , or use of any thing depending upon it . ADVERSARIES . FOR the justifying of the manner of their rebaptizing , and to proue that the Disciples of Christ , though no Pastors ( they must add , nor having any Church-calling ) may baptize : their first instance is from Iohn Baptist , who was no Pastor , and yet baptized . DEFENCE . WEE grant it ; No more was Christ himselfe a Pastor in our sense , nor his Apostles . But we say Iohn , as they , had an immediate and extraordinary calling , not onely to exercise , but also to introduce the ordinance of Baptism : being expresly prophesyed of before by Esay and Malachy : promised to his father Zachary , by an Angell of the Lord , and filled with the Holy Ghost from his mothers womb . Will these men compare their conceited gift of converting , with Iohns divine , and extraordinary charter and endowments ? We say , with Christ our Lord , that Iohn was a Prophet , and more then a Prophet : They answer us , that the least disciple , or that hath Iohns doctrine , in the Kingdom of God is greater then he . But we reply , that Christ doth not there mean the least disciple , but the least able Minister of the new Testament , wherof these Ana-baptizers are none . When Christ asked the Iews , if they went out to see a Prophet : Think we , he meant of any ordinary Iew , having a poor gift of expounding the Scriptures , like these mens ? Or not rather of some , both of singular abilities , and speciall calling ? So , by the least in the Kingdom of heaven , he means the least Minister of the new Testament , furnished with speciall abilities , and calling . Besides , his meaning is , not that the least Minister , no nor the greatest neither , was greater then Iohn the Baptist in respect of power of ministring Baptism : for none was comparable to him this way , being under God the instituter of it , and the Baptist , which neither Peter nor Paul was : But the greatnesse here , is in regard onely of the more full knowledg of Christ , not onely come in the flesh , and entred upon his Ministery , as in Iohns time ; but having finished his work upon earth , and being dead for our sins , and risen again , and ascended into the heavens ; whence he did , and doth most graciously , and powerfully administer his Kingdom amongst men . Is it not enough for Iohn Murton , and his consorts , to be equall with Iohn Baptist in the power of baptizing , but they will needs perck aboue him therein , and bee greater then he . But it is no new thing for the bramble to advance it selfe aboue all the trees , even the vine , oliue , and fig-tree . But such pride will haue a fall . The Lord grant it may be by , or with repentance , to prevent the down-fall to perdition . To their instancing the disciples of Christ , and Ananias his baptizing , what shall I say more then I haue done in the very writing which they undertake to answer ? Wherein I haue proved , that these instances are so far from helping them , as that they make plainly against them , as the Reader that will , may see . To my proofs they answer nothing at all , nor confirm their own tenent further , by any circumstance of the Text. Onely they tell us in the generall , that these things were written for our learning : We grant it , and therewith affirm , that amongst other things , we are to learn this from them ; that such as are to baptize , are to be furnished with ( besides , and aboue the gift of teaching ) a speciall warrant and calling from Christ , either extraordinary and immediate , as had these disciples , and Ananias ; or ordinary , and mediate by the Church : which alone is delegated by Christ the Lord , with authority to call men to the ministering of his solemn Ordinances ; wherof Baptism is one , and not the use of a gift , as bare teaching is . In opening Math. 28 , Goe teach all Nations , &c. they shew a strange streyn of wit ; in gathering from thence , that any disciple of Christ may baptize , from whence all others of learning or judgment ( of all Sects ) doe gather the contrary , and that none , but such as haue speciall calling to teach may baptize . Let us examine things particularly . And first , I affirm , that the Lord in that place giues an Apostolicall commission properly ; which I thus proue . First , because he bids them Goe , or goe forth and teach all Nations : opposing the Apostles going forth , and teaching all Nations then , to the Prophets tarrying , and teaching that one Nation of the Iews formerly . Doe or can these men ( though their feet abide not in the house , Prov. 7. 11 , ) goe to , and teach all Nations ? Their answer is frivilous , that every Disciple is to doe this according to his best abilitie , seeing the Lord calls none to a state or work , but such as he furnisheth with answerable abilities . By such answers , the calling of any how unfit soever , to any place or state how excellent soever , might be justified . Secondly , if not in this place , I would know when , and where Christ gaue the commission properly Apostolicall . Where they add , that the Apostles haue left their power wholly behind them , and that nothing is dead but their persons : they erre not a little ; For not onely their persons are dead , but their office also is ceased . If any now haue the power of Apostles , they haue then the office of Apostles first , from which the power is , and in which it is to be exercised . If they say , they are Apostles ; they are not , but are easily found lyars by plain direction of the Scriptures . Besides , they expresly contradict themselvs in the same place , in saying , The commission was given to such , as whose persons remains to the end of the world . If their persons be dead , how remain they ? But they add , as their corner stone , that this commission was given to the succeeders of the Apostles in their doctrine from time to time , with whom Christ promiseth to be present alwaies , even to the end . If I should answer ( as I know not but I might lawfully , ) that these words of Christ , I am with you alway , even unto the end of the world , are to be expounded as those of the Apostle , 1 Thess. 4. 15. 17 , Wee which are aliue , and remain unto the comming of the Lord , and that the meaning of both is , that all should so walk , as if that day of the Lord were to come every day of their liues , what would they reply ? But admit this be spoken mediately to the successours of the Apostles ( not in their power Apostolicall , for that ceaseth with their office Apostolicall , and their office with their persons ; neither is there left in the Church any authority or direction for the chusing of Apostles , but ) in the performance of such ordinary works , in lawfull order , as the Apostles were to exercise themselvs in , specially of teaching and baptizing , there mentioned : I thus proue , that by those successors are not meant , as they conceiv disciples , but such as haue speciall commission , and authority , and so specially Pastors . And first , Christ here opposeth them to whom he speaks , as the makers of Disciples ( as the words are ) to Disciples to be made by them . Secondly , if every disciple of Christ , then why not women also , which are disciples as well as men , and wherof there are diverse to be found better gifted then any of this fellowship ? Neither can they object the Apostles prohibition of women , 1 Cor. 11 , & 1 Tim. 2 , seeing they hold Baptism no Church action , but personall onely ; and so administer it as privately , as Midwines use to doe . Thirdly , if Pastors be most rightfully the Apostles successors in other works of their Apostolicall commission here given ; by name , in administring the Lords Supper , and over-seeing the flock , and defending the same in the truth , which they grant : why not in teaching , and baptizing also , which alone are expressed ? Math. 28. ADVERSARIES . BVT this they account a meer fiction , seeing converting and baptizing is no part of the Pastors office , which is to feed , watch and oversee the flock of Christ , and defend the same in the truth : then which they deny further charge to be laid upon him by his office : quoting for that purpose , Act. 20. 28 , Tit. 1. 9 , proceeding also to challenge it as an imagination , that he is to preach by vertue of his office : yea , adding that any disciple having ability is authorized , yea commanded to preach , convert , and baptize , as well , and as much , if not more , then any Pastour . To this height of usurpation are these Chorites come . DEFENCE . FIrst here , as alwaies , they alter the state of the question , which between them and me is not whether onely Pastors , but whether onely such as haue a speciall Church-calling , may baptize ? Secondly , it is true , that Pastors in the right state of things , are not to be set over heards of goats and swine , but over flocks of sheep : yet doth it not follow thereupon that Pastors in no sort convert . For first , there may be in the Church hypocrites undetected , or after detection , yet uncensured , which they may by Gods blessing effectually convert . Secondly , the Pastor as Pastor of the flock , and feeding it , may convert a stranger comming in : and why then not baptize him by their own ground ? The person so converted publiquely , may and ought to be baptized publiquely ; and should not the Pastor doe it ( by whom also hee is converted ) rather then a private member ? Thirdly , it is not all one ( though they confound them ) to convert , to wit , from being wicked to become godly , and to make a disciple . Children born in the Church may be made Disciples , yet not so converted ; as it may be never having been such , as of whom it could be said , that they were wicked . Fourthly , it is their ignorance to make converting of men , and the baptizing them , actions of the same nature : seeing onely men and women before converted , and repenting , are to be baptized . Lastly , in granting , according to the Scriptures , that the Pastor is by office to feed the flock : they cannot deny , but that hee is to baptize thereby : seeing baptism is a part of that feeding properly , serving to confirm the faith of beleevers in the washing away of their sinnes by the bloud of Christ ; Begetting is by the seed of the word , the word of truth : and so whatsoever means follow thereupon , is but for feeding and nourishing the so begotten . ADVERSARIES . BVT that which followeth is admirable , viz. that the Pastour is not required to preach , nor doth perform it by vertue of his office , when he doth it . DEFENCE . MAny men ( and these with the rest ) haue spoken many absurd things in religion : but these in this exceed them all , yea and themselves . They from Act. 20 , affirm that the Pastours are to feed the flock by their office . And can the flock be fed as it ought without preaching , and where the bread of life is not broken unto it ? They also graunt in the same place from Titus 1. 9. that he is to defend the flock in the truth against all gainsayers , But why to defend the flock &c. as their cunning and corrupt glosse is , rather then as the words of the text are , by sound doctrine both to exhort , and convince the gainsaier . Are exhortations and convictions by sound doctrine no preachings with these men ? yea , are they not directly for the conversion of gainsayers ? And how then belongs it not to Pastours , to whom these things belong , to convert ? So where it is required that the Bishop ( to be called ) be apt to teach , is he not by his office to doe that which is requisite in him for his enabling unto it . I say for the enabling of him unto his office , and not for the adorning of it onely , as hospitality is : which though he wholy want ability to perform , yet that disables him not ; as the want of aptnes to teach doth . Ioyn with these the Apostles exhortation , that the Elders that rule well be had in double honour ; specially they that labour in the word , and doctrine ; for the labourer is worthy of his reward : and what can be clearer , then that the Pastour is to preach by his office , and that as being the speciall work , for which his wages are due unto him . Is not to labour in the word and doctrine here spoken of , for him to preach , and that as an Elder ; as the former rule , as Elders ? Strange it is that , a Pastour or Teacher by office should not teach and preach by office ; that is , not exercise their office or ministery , the Teacher in teaching , and Exhorter , or Pastour in exhortation . And see we not here what new Patrons dumb ministers haue gotten ; of whom the old almost every where are ashamed ? If it be not required of the Pastour to preach by his office , then though he never preach at all , yet it cannot be said to Archippus , fulfill thy ministery , which thou hast received in the Lord. The Pastour might , by their Canon , most faithfully perform and fulfill his office though he never preached one sermon all his life long . But as all errours haue some truth either in them , or nigh unto them , and so are raised upon mistaking of one thing for another , with which it hath some affinity : So is it in this case . For first the ability or gift to teach is not by the office , but before it , and meerly personall , and so remains even in the officer ; and the same greater in one then in another , though the office be the same in both . Yet because the gift fits for the office , and enables to the performing of it many unskilfully confound them . Secondly , there is both a liberty , and duty of using the same gift in time & place , before and without the office . But herewith ( the office concurring ) is joyned , and added a bond of authority , and speciall charge upon the officer to wait upon his office , the Teacher in teaching , the Exhorter , or Pastor in exhortation , as the Apostle speaks . Here amongst sundry Scriptures , not so much as looking towards the matter in hand , but speaking of the generall liberties of Christians , and graces of Christianity , common to women with men , and to such men as want all gifts of teaching with others , they alledg , 1 Cor. 14. 1 , and the Apostle then commanding every beleever to covet to preach . But first , why put they preaching , and not prophesying , as the Text , and all translations haue it ? Secondly , it is their presumption , that he speaks of every beleever . Was every beleever to covet spirituall gifts , to wit , all both extraordinary and ordinary there mentioned ? And are there not many in all Churches , who , without a miracle , cannot possibly attain to any competent ability to teach publiquely in the Church ? But let them stretch the words to their own size , what follows hereupon ? All are to desire the gift of exhortation , &c. and such as haue it , to use it in time and place : Ergo , it is not required of Pastors by vertue of their office to exhort . Why not then thus ? It is required of every member of the Church in his place , to watch for the good of the whole , and to defend the same against gain-sayers in the truth : and therfore it is an imagination , which these men in the page before going affirm , that the Pastour is by his office to watch , and defend the flock against gain-sayers : Or thus . It concerns every Christian , being able , to distribute to the necessities of the Saints , and therefore not to the Deacons by vertue of their office ; which yet for the very thing are called Distributers in the same place . Every citizen and subject is bound to defend his citie and country against the enemy in his place and standing ; and therefore by their consequence , not the Magistrate by vertue of his Magistracy . Their conclusion therefore , that a Pastor is not bound to teach by his office , because hee mightafter a sort , and in an order , teach without it ; it is , as if they should tell us , that he who is bound to a post with one coard , cannot be bound with two . ADVERSARIES . THey add , that the Church may receiv in members , without officers , or when they are sick , or in prison , and so baptize them , as the primitiue Churches were gathered by faith and baptism , and that being without Pastors a good while , which the Apostles afterwards placed amongst them . DEFENCE . THey oft say , but never proue , that Churches are gathered by baptism . Baptism is an ordinance and service given to the Church , as were the statutes and services of old , given to Israel , and Circumcision amongst the rest . If the Church receiv in men by baptizing them ; then it is to cast them out by unbaptizing them . For they are to be put out or excommunicated by the undoing of that , by the doing of which they were taken in . Besides , receiving in , and casting out of members are dispensations of Christs Kingdom ; Baptism of his Propheticall office . Thirdly , as both infants might be born in the Church , and men of years received into it , and both the one and other be be baptized afterwards , as God affoarded fit and lawfull means : so can it not be proved , specially in the plenty that then was , that the Apostles still left not behind them some extraordinary Officers , Prophets , or Evangelists to water , where they had planted , and to order things unperfected . Lastly , let be observed , how in this place , they make it a work of the same power , to baptize , and to receiv members into the Church : and wherupon it must follow inavoidably , that Baptism administred by one alone , and without a Church power ( which theirs was , and is , ) is unlawfull : seeing one alone is not a Church , nor hath power to receiv in , or cast out members . To conclude the point about the Apostles successors . The Apostle Paul , calling unto him at Miletus the Elders , or Bishops of the Church of Ephesus , and charging them to feed the flock wherof they were made Over-seers by the Holy Ghost ; and for their direction therin , propounding unto thē his own Apostolicall example to be followed by them in so many particulars , shews who are the Apostles ordinarie successors in their severall charges . The same also doth the Apostle Peter , in calling himselfe a Sympresbyter , or fellow-Elder with the ordinarie Elders . And truly what man , not at utter defyance with common sense , will denie that a Pastor in his charge is more properly an Apostles successour , then a private brother . In answering mine exceptions , they build amisse upon my foundation , and father their bastards upon me : knowing that I both put , and haue proved against them , elsewhere , a difference between no Baptism , and Baptism unlawfully administred , in divers respects ; and that the latter , though it ought not so to haue been administred , or received ; yet ought not to be iterated ; specially , if God haue added therunto the inward Baptism of the spirit of regeneration . Now my proofs , howsoever by them vilified , confirm , that besides and aboue the personall abilitie to teach , a speciall calling is requisite for him that dispenseth the ordinance of Baptism . This speciall calling ordinarie is by the Church , which alone hath Christs delegated power for Ordinances . The Argument I thus frame . That which by many proofs of Scripture appears to haue been done by speciall calling , and commission from Christ , and never otherwise ; that not being done by such speciall calling , and commission , is unlawfully done : But by the proofs by me brought , it appears that Baptism hath still been ministred by speciall calling , and commission , and not otherwise ▪ therefore , these mens Baptism not so administred , was , and is , unlawfully administred ; and so they by their own grounds ( which they vainly make mine ) unbaptized persons . Neither can they make an escape by saying , that they in whom I instance had no calling by the Church , nor were Pastors of particular flocks : Seeing our question is not of Pastors , but of such as haue a Church-calling : and that Iohn Baptist , Christs disciples , Phillip , and the rest , had a calling extraordinarie , These Adversaries neither haue the former , nor challenge the latter . And indeed , by this defence , so oft renewed by them , they make it evident to all the world , that they neither consider of their own practise seriously , nor of mine exceptions . Of the difference between teaching and baptising , I shall speak in the fourth Rule : as I haue also formerly , both in this Treatise , and else-where , at large cleered their exception about ordination : which they cunningly dissemble . Here I onely demand of them , whether one man alone , without either presence , or preceding election of the Church , may ordain a Pastor , as is their manner of baptizing . And for me , doe they not know in their consciences that I was ordained publiquely upon the solemn calling of the Church , in which I serue , both in respect of the Ordainers , and Ordained ? Whilst then they account me wilfully blinde in putting difference between my Church ordination & their Baptism ; they shew themselvs witlesly blinde in making them alike . To my proof , from Math. 3 , that Christ in comming to Iohn to be baptized of him , fulfilled all righteousnesse , &c. they answer , That this is still done , when any disciple , &c : Wherein first , they make both Iohn and Christ , disciples of Christ : Secondly , if Christ had herein considered Iohn as an ordinarie disciple onely , what needed he to haue come from one countrey to another , even from Galilee , to Iordan in Iudea , to haue been baptized of him ? Why might he not as well haue used some ordinary disciple neer at hand ? Christ therefore , in being baptized by Iohn , fulfilled all righteousnesse , in consecrating unto us Baptism , as Circumcision to the fathers , in his own person , who of God is made unto us righteousnesse : and that by Iohns ministery , who had a most solemn and singular calling thereunto . Lastly , it is not likely , which they take for certain , that Iohn in these words , I had need to be baptized of thee , meant not ( to wit at all ) of the baptism with water , considering that the quest on between our Lord and him , was about that Baptism and none other . The words therefore insinuate , that some special state and calling is required in the Baptizer aboue these mens common disciple-ship . Heer first in answering Ioh. 1. 19. 25 , for their own credite they disgrace the Priests and Levits , as blind and ignorant Pharisees , for demanding of Iohn , by what authority he baptized . But considering both their places , and Iohns practise in bringing a new ordinance of Religion into the Church , they did nothing herein not well sorting with their office . Secondly , their answer , that Iohn proovs his authority to baptize , by proving his authority to preach , from Esaias the Prophet : Esa. 40. 3 , shews , how short their wits are in gageing the depth of the Scriptures . He doth not proue his authority to baptize , by a common authority or liberty to teach , which any of Israel ( gifted ) might use ; but he justifies his whole ministery , in all the parts of it , by his speciall calling , as the harbinger and fore-runner of Christ , plainly foretold by Esay and Malachy . Doe they think , that the Prophets words , The voyce of one crying in the wildernes , appertained to every Israelite that could teach ; as they ascribe power to baptize to each of their teaching disciples ? Or might Iohn , without a special calling , haue instituted and brought into the Church , as he did , a new ordinance ? Yea I would know , which of Iohns disciples ever offered to baptize ? Of whom yet it cannot be doubted , but divers were able to teach . As Cowards most vilifie in words , where in deed they dare doe least , so doe these men account this proof most vain , against which they haue nothing to bring , saving an equivocation in the word Ordinances , and a cunning course in leaving out that which I alledg from Rom. 12. 3 , which would discover the fallacie . The different nature of baptism and teaching ( meerly by a personall gift ) is evident . A man becomes a Prophet , and able to teach , by the gifts of the Spirit , knowledge and utterance . But I would know by what gift of the Spirit any becoms a Baptizer , or able to baptize ? 2 Besides the Scriptures , 1 Pet. 1. 12 , the light of nature , and generall law of loue , shews , that he who knows any thing profitable for another , should in his place , & upon occasion declare it to him : so as teaching by him that hath abilitie , hath its plain foundation in nature : But so is not Baptism by the light of nature ; but meerly ordained and instituted of God by supernaturall revelation ; in which respect I call it an ordinance ▪ And this consideration alone , if there were nothing else , wil with reasonable men , oversway all their presumptions ▪ Actions of religion are some of them performed immediately from a personall gift , and grace of the spirit in the heart , as preaching , or prophesying , and prayer , out of a speciall state or office ; others , by no speciall gift of the spirit at all , but by authoritie conferred upon some speciall person ; as the ministration of Sacraments , censures , ordination , & the like : & lastly , some others by both , as pastoral preaching , prayer , &c : the gift ministring abilitie ; and the office charge to use the gift , for feeding of the flock committed to the officer . In answering my fift Proof , the alledg things partly imper●●n●nt , and partly unreasonable . Of the former sort is their discourse about the Eun●●chs being a member of Christ , and his remaining in any particular Church : Whereas they should haue answered directly , whether by his faith and baptism hee had been made a member of any particular Church , or not ? But they seeing what would follow upon a direct answer , haue rather chosen an indirect evasion . Of like hue is that which they add of Israels renewed covenant , ( conceiving Israel as a true Church ) which we meddle not with in this businesse . Absurd it is in it selfe , and a slandering of our practise , which they affirm of one casting out another , where there are but two of a Church . Which of us ever so held or practized ? One man , or woman either , may upon just ground , separate from a whole Church : may he , or she therfore excommunicate a whole Church ? Or hath I. M. excommunicated the whole Church of England ? Separation , where lawfull , onely shews the liberty , which every Christian hath to keep himselfe pure from the sins of others : Excommunication imports a judiciarie power and state of authority to execute a solemn censure and punishment : which appertains onely to the Church gathered together in Christs name ; which one cannot be . Two may joyn together , and so receiving one another mutually may become a Church : or may , upon just occasion , part a sunder , and so dissolv : but cannot receiv in , to speak properly , or cast out one another , by solemn ordinance : this imports authority ; the former , liberty onely . But thus it becomes the new builders of Babylon , to use brick for stone , and lime for well tempered morter . Their answer to my sixt proofe about witnesses of the baptism , that Phillip baptized the Eunuch , and Ananias , Saul , none else being by , is presumptuous . It is apparant , Act. 8 , that the Eunuch had divers in his r●tinue , and most probable , that some of them were godly also , and baptized with him , though the story mention him alone . Neither is it like , that Ananias in that citie , where so many Christians were , was not accompanyed with some or other of them . Besides , those Baptisms were administred by extraordinarie , and miraculous direction , and assistance ; and therefore not to be drawn , for the manner , into ordinarie example . Lastly , these instances overthrow their main ground , which is , that all particular Churches , are gathered by Faith and Baptism . One alone cannot be a Church : Neither is a Church gathered by that which may lawfully be performed without a Church-gathering . Pauls own manifestation of the grace of Christ received , was sufficient testimonie of his conversion ; and the Churches weaknes it was , to stand need of further witness . In their answer to mine other demand , that any disciple present , though no instrument of conversion , may baptize , they raze their own main ground ( which how sandie soever , yet is theirs ) from Math. 28. 19 , that Every Disciple , that can teach , or make disciples , according to his best abilitie , may baptize ; and whosoever makes a disciple may baptize ; and that Christ hath coupled them together , and that no man should seperate them , &c. yet here themselvs seperate them , in affirming that any disciple , though making no disciple , nor being instrument of conversion , may baptize . Their instances of Christs baptizing none , but leaving that to his followers , and Pauls baptizing few in Corinth , are too presumptuous . It is too much vanity for base persons to play on stages the parts of Kings : what is it then for Iohn Murton , to play Christ and Paul ( if yet Paul had not Evangelists in his companie ) in commanding others of his disciples to baptize his converts , as Christ our Lord did his ? About womens baptism , they are like a bird in a net , seeking many holes to get out , but finding none . First , they answer , that women may neither teach nor baptize in the Church : True : But why not , as they doe ? which is , not in the Church ; but out of it , and in a corner , where , it may be , none is present but the baptizer and baptized ? They say further , that women haue been , and may bee , worthy instruments of converting of others . I grant it , and that even of men . But may they therfore baptize them ? This they dare not say , nor doe ; and yet except they say it , they must unsay their so oft repeated lesson , They that may convert , may baptize . Their dispute from my former plea out of Mr. Perkins , that where God giues the word , he giues the power also , helps not : For first , both Mr. Perkins , and I , speak of a Church having this power of the Lord , and not of a single person . If all the body were one member , where were the body , or Church , saith the Apostle ? These men make all the body , and one member the same . One and all , and all and one , is all one with them . Secondly , we speak of having and using the power of the Lord , according to the Lords order ; and not in their confused ▪ fashion . Which order of the Lord is , that men first be called ( ordinarily ) by the Church , and so minister baptism as the stewards of the mysteries of God. Lastly , they most wrongfully accuse Peter Martyr , and me from him , as pleading for womens baptism : the Reader that pleaseth , may see the contrary . I doe not , as they here challenge me , in answering their objection , that because men , by vertue of their gift , without other calling , may doe the greater which is teaching , they may doe the lesse , which baptizing is : wrong them ; as saying , having no calling , but no other calling but by their gift . If they haue any other calling , though not Pastorall , let them shew it ; and so renounce their former plea raysed from their personall gifts alone . Their proof that he that may doe the greater may doe the lesse , is taken from Mathew 23. 16. 17. - 19. 20. &c. Wherein they say , Christ proveth plainly , that either it was not lawfull for them to swear by the gold , and the offerings , which were lesser : or that it was lawfull for them to swear by the temple , and altar . Nothing lesse . It was lawfull to swear by none of them all , but by the Lord onely : The meaning of Christ was to reprove the hypocrisy and coveteousnes of the Pharisees , that bare the people in hand , that if they sware by the altar , and temple , it bound them not , at least , in comparison ; but if they swore by the gold , or offering , that oath bound them to performance ; that by this means , they might possesse the peoples minds with an high opinion of the offrings , and gold , which turned to their proper advantage and profit . If from hence they would conclude any thing as lawfull from the greater to the lesse , they must argue thus . If it be lawfull to swear by the greater , then by the lesse much more : But it is lawfull to swear by the greater , and greatest , God himself , that dwelleth in the temple : Therefore it is lawfull to swear by the temple , altar , sacrifice , heaven , earth , &c. If they would be ashamed of this conclusion , so may they be of their argumentation . My plea for the power of calling ministers , and censuring offenders by the Church where officers are wanting ( which here again they bring in ) is in their hand , like a sword in a childs hand , wherewith he sooner hurts himself , then his enemie . For ( to let passe the difference between the power of receiving in , and casting out of members , and so of chusing of ministers , on the one side ; and of baptizing on the other , elswhere manifested ) they here strike thorow their own course , in confessing that these things must be done by the Churches power and right ; by which they baptize not , but merely by a personall liberty : by which yet they themselvs , I suppose , would be loath to avow the calling of ministers , and censuring of offenders . That my collection from Scripture is their conviction , & makes plainly against their corner stone , that he which may doe the greater may doe the lesse , they may see , if they please to consider it . For if the Prophets in Israel ( not being Levites ) though preaching Gods word , might not carry the ashes from under the altar ; but the Levites onely ; then their rule holds not absolutely , that he that may doe the greater , may doe the lesse ; and so they must confesse , except they will deny the preaching of Gods word to be a greater thing then the carrying of the ashes out of the Temple . The former part of their first answer ; that the preists onely ( they should say the Levites ) were appointed to this , makes against them , as shewing , that we are not to measure our liberty or power by the greatnesse or smalnesse of the thing , but by Gods appoyntment , who hath allotted to every one his portion . Their second answer is of admirable devise , that as the preists might meddle with all the services of the old Testament ; So all the saints being preists unto God ( no men excepted ) may meddle with all the services of the new Testament . But why might , and may ; and not ought , and must ? The Preists under the Law were bound ( leaving unto the high Preist his function , and to the Levites , theirs ) in their courses , to all the services of the Tabernacle , and Temple So by their crooked rule , every Christian ( no men excepted ) not onely may , in liberty , but must in duty , minister not onely baptism but the Lords Supper also , and all other ordinances , in his turn : and so all must be alike for publicke ministrations ; for all are Preists to God alike . All the congregation are holy every one of them , and the Lord is among them , and you Moses and Aaron , take too much upon you ; said Korah of old . They err grosly therefore in making all Preists , for all publique ordinances in the Church : whereof some appertayn to Christs Propheticall administration as the sacraments , which are seales of the Covenant dispensed by preaching : others to his kingdom , as the appointing of officers , and censuring of offenders . Our Christian Preisthood stands onely in our offering of spirituall sacrifices to God , our selvs first , and so consequently the sacrifices of prayses , and prayer from a broken heart , works of mercy , and the like . That baptism is a service of the Temple , that is , an ordinance of the Church , we haue formerly proved : And surely strange it is , that I should need to proue , that there is any ordinance of religion which the Church is not to administer . Paul and Apollos , and Cephas are the Churches , and is not their baptism theirs ? This whilst they compare to the hewing of stones in the mountains , they lay in common for ministration to very unbeleevers , with disciples : for the Zidonians , or other of the Heathens , as well as Israelites might either square stones , or hew wood for the Temple . Lastly , touching my similitude . As it cannot be denyed , but that the setting of the seal unto the Kings pardon granted to a malefactour , is a matter both of more solemnity , and authority , then the bare manifestation and making known of the same pardon ; which any , ordinarily , may do to any , as oportunity servs : So haue I proved long agoe against these Adversaries , by many Arguments , hitherto by them unanswered , and I assure my self unanswerable , that the outward baptism , of which we speak , is an outward seal of the Covenant of grace : that is , an holy outward signe ordained of God , as a means by the work of the spirit , to confirm the faith of the Church in her washing , both from the guilt and contagion of sin , by the bloud of Christ Iesus . More then this , we mean not in calling the Sacraments Seals , with the Apostle ; and lesse none can yeeld them , that hath learnt their right use , either from his own fruitfull experience , or the Scriptures information . Glory be to God , and good to men . FINIS . Courteous Reader , take knowledge that ( the Author being absent ) through oversight these faults ( mostly materiall ) haue escaped , which I pray thee correct as thou readest : if more thou findest , impute them to hastie oversight . PAge 24 line 5 , for sin stands not in &c. reade , sin stands in , &c. pag. 40 , lin . 1 , for are done , read , are not done : p. 44 l. 3● , for of themselvs the , r. of the : p. 45. l. 20 , for and , r. add : p. 56 , l. 12 , for calling , r. calling : p. 72. l. 6 , for falsifying , r. falsitie : p. 80. l. 11 , for purpose , r. purposes : p. 81. l. 8 , after vers . add comma : p. 93. l 4 , for but will , r. but nil : p. 134 , l. 4 , for regenerate , r. unregenerate : p. 137. l. 25 , for indossolible , r. indissolible : p. 156 , l. 12 , for casuality , r. causality : p. 168 , l. 22 , for or Will , that , in r. or Will in● p. 175 , l. 15 , for things , as , r. things ? As. Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A10833-e70 Rom. 10. 2. Epistle to the Reader ▪ 1 Cor. 14. 38. Eph. 4. 8. 11. Phil. 4. 4. Act. 20. 19 Eph. 4. 15. Notes for div A10833-e450 Pag. 3. 1 Pet. 1. 1● ▪ 20. Synod Dor. Art. 6. 15 , of divine providence . Pag. 4. 5. Gen. 3. Act. 2. 22. 23 , & ch . 4. 27. 28. Pag , 28. 29 ▪ Ioh. 3. 16. Gal. 2. 20. 1. Ioh. 4. 9. Rom 5. vers 25. 29. Mark. 3. 31. Luk. 24. 20. ▪ 26. Ioh. 12. 32. 33. Gal. 3. 13. 2. Sam. 12. 10. 11. 12. 2 King. 29 ▪ 19. Psal. 119. 160 , 164 ▪ Pag. 5. Gen. 22. Exod. 4. 21. 22. Luk. 12. 50. & . 22. 42. Pag. 5. Pag. 6. 2 Sam. 12 , & 15 , & 16. Rom. 1. Pag. 6. 7. 2. Pet. 2. 10. Iude 10. Iam. 1. 17. Pag. 7. 3. 9. 10. Prov. 16. 4. Rom. 11. 36 Pag. 10. 1 Tim. 6. 16 1 Tim. 1. 17 ▪ Psal. 115. 4. Pag. 11. Pag. 11. 12 1 Cor. 12. 4. Pag. 12. ● Tim. 5. 21 Esay 6. 2. Mat. 16. 11. Ioh. 4. 34. Act. 20. 28. Mat. 18. 7. 1 Cor. 11. 19 1 King. 2 ● ▪ Chap. 12. 23 & 33. 11 ▪ Prov. 1. 2● Chap. 33. 1● ▪ 2 Tim. 2. 24. 25. 26. Ioh. 6. 44. Psal. 135. 6. Pag. 12 , 13. 14. Matth. 25. Gen. 1. 1. 2. ●●● . 17. 28 ●●● . 146. 6 ▪ Mat. 15. 1● Gen. 38. Pag. 14 , 15 ▪ 17. Ma● . 11. 29 Pag. 17. Pag. 17. Pag. 18. Act. 15. 18. Pag. 19. Esay 53. 7 ▪ 10. Iam. 1. 17. ● Sam. 14. 29. Pag. 20. Pag. 20 , 21 ▪ 22. Prov. 16. 23 Mat. 10. 29 Pag. 23. &c Gen. 45. Exod. 4. & 9. Iob. 1. 2. Sam. 16. 2. Sam. 24. 2. King. 22 Esay 10. 2. Thess. 2. Pag. 23. 2 Sam. 16. 10. Iob 1. 21. 2 Sam. 24. 1 Pag. 24. 1 King. 22. Pag. 25. Rom. 11. 3● Pag. 26. Esa. 10. 6. 7 12. 13. &c. Pag. 31. Pag. 27. Mat. 8. 15. Mark. 1. 31 2 Sam. 18 ▪ 22. 23. Gen. 45. 5. 7. 8. Pag. 30 , Pag. 4 , 5. 6. 7. 8. ●ee Vrsinus of the divine Providence . Pag. 31. 32 vers . 3● . Mat. 4. 10. 11. Mat. 13. 1● ch . 11. 26 ▪ Rom. 9. 8 Notes for div A10833-e8280 Pag. 34. 35 Of divine Predestination , Art. 7. Pag. 34. ●● 36. Mat. 11. 28 Mat. 11. 24 Pag. 3● ▪ Psal. 15. ●● Ezech. 11. 19 , & chap. 36. 26. 27. Mat. 25. 26 Rom. 8. 30 Ephes. 1. 9. Ioh. 1. 12. Eph. 2. 8. ● Cor. 2. 14 15. 1 Cor. 3. 6. 7 Ioh. 6 44. Vers. 47. 2 Tim. 2. 24. 25. Luk. 18. 10 ●1 . Pag. 36. 37. 38. 39. &c. Mat. 11. 25 Act. 16. 14 Act. 13. 18 2. Tim. 2 ▪ 25. Ephes. 1. 4. Pag. 42. 43 Prov. 7. Vers. 3. Vers. 11. Rom. 8. ●● Eph. 1. 3. 4. 5. 13. Math. 22. ● . 12. Act. 15. 18 Pag. 39. 42 43. 44. Ephes. 1. 4. Vers. 5. Deut. 4. 35. ch . 7. 7. 8 , ch . 14. 2. Psal. 65. 4. Iob. 15. 16. Iam. 1. 6. ● Iob. 3. 22. Ephes. 2. 8 ▪ 2 Tim. 2. 2● chap. 10. 3. 6 ● . 4. ● Pet. 1. 2. Iam. 2. 5. Eph. 1. 4. 1 Cor. 1. 2. ● Pet. 1. 3. Pag. 39. Ioh. 15. 19 ▪ 1 Ioh. 3. 13 ▪ & 5. 19. Pag. 40. Pag. 40. 41 Pag. 41. 42 43. 44. Pag. 43. 44 Ephe. 1 4. 5 Math. 11. 25. 26. Rom. ● . 21. ●2 . 23. Pag. 44. Pag. 44. 45 46 , &c ▪ Act. 20. 2● . Rom. 5. 10. Ver. 6. 8. Pag. 45. Ver. 15. 16. 17. Vers 9. Vers. 17. Ioh. 14 , 13. 1 Ioh. 5. 14 Math. 23. 3 Act. 2. 4● . Luk. 13. 23. 24. 1. Ioh. 1. 15 Math. 7. 6. 2. Tim. 4. 14. Psal. 36. 7. Vers. 1. 3. Chap. 1. 9. Ioh. 13 , 1. Ioh. 3. 16. Rom. 5. 6. 1 Cor. 6. 20 ▪ 1 Tim. 2. 6. Mat. 20 ▪ 25 ▪ Ephes. 1. 7. Pag. 45. Act. 13. 48 Act. 18. 10 1. Cor. 3. 6. 7. Chap. 6. 20. Pag. 46. Psa. 147. 19 ●0 . Rom. 15. 20. 21. Pag. 46. 47 ▪ Rom. 9. 22. Rom. 11. 33 ▪ 2. Pet. 2. 4. Iude 6. Pag. 47. Pag. 47. 48 ▪ 49. &c. Pag. 4● . Pag. 117. Rom. 7. 22. 23. 25. Pag. 50. 51 ▪ 52. &c. Rom. 2. 14. 15. Act. 4. 10. 12 1 Cor. 15. 2. 3. 4. 1 Cor. 10. 20. 21. 22. Mystery of Iniqui . p. 91 Deu. 32. 1● 1 Cor. 10 20 Psalm . 106. 35. ●7 . Pausaniasin Ach. i●is ▪ M●crob . 1. Saturn , &c. & ali● . Pag. 53. Mat. 13. 13 14. 19. 1 Cor. 1. 23 Eph. 3. 5. Pag. 53. Pag. 54. Pag. 55. Pag. 54. Rom. 1. Act. 17. 27 ▪ Pag. 57. Act. 14. 16. Ezech. 3. 6. Mat. 11. 2● 21. 23. Ioh. 3 ▪ Mat. 11. 25 Eph. 1. 3. 4. 5. Pag. 57. Mat. 5. 1. 2. Psal. 147. 19. 20. Act. 14. 16 1● . Rom. 1. Act. 1● . 3● Rom. 10. 14. 15. Rom. 15. 20. 21. Pag. 57. 58 Pag. 90. Rom. 9. ●8 . 22. Pag. 60. Chap. 11. 5. 7. Heb. 12. 16. Gen. 25. 32. 33 , &c. Pag. 39. Vers. 15. Pag. 64. Pag. 64. 65 Gen. 25. 23 ▪ Vers. 11. Gen. 1● . 7. 8 Exod. 3. 6. 7 Deut. 7. 7. 8. & 29. 12. 13. 14. Pag. 65. Pag. 65. 1. Ioh. 5. 10. 1 Tim. 1. 13 Gal. 4. 29. Ioh. 3. 33 ▪ Pag. 67. Exod. 5. ● . Hebr. 3. 7. 8 15. 18. 19. Rom. 2. 1. Ezech. 11. 14 & 33. 21. 26. Exod. 4. 7 , 8 , &c. Pag. 68. Exod. 9. 16. Rom. 9. 17. Rom. 7. 8. Mat. 10. 34 35. Prov. 21. 1. Vers. 6. Pag. 69. Pag. 70. Deut. 19. Gen. 31. Act. 9. Prov. 21. ● . Gen. 22 ▪ Iam. 1. 17. Heb. 6. 4. 5. 6. Pag. 71. 72 ▪ Pag. 69. Rom. 3. 23. & 4. 15. Gal 3. 9. 10 &c. Vers. 21. Pag. 72. 73 Pag. 75. Pag. 76. Iob. 1. 12. 1 Iob. 5. 1● 12. Notes for div A10833-e20390 Pag. 78. Rom. 9. 11 Pag. 39. 42 45. 75. Ephes. 1. 3. 4. 5. ● . Col. 2. 9. Ioh. 17. 6. 8 Eph. 2. 22. 1 Pet. 1. 5. 2 Cor. 3. 5. 2 Cor. 12. 9. 1 Cor. 15. 10. Psal. 16. 1● . Num. 9 12 Ex. 12. 46. Psal. 34. 21. Ioh. 19. 36 ▪ Psal. 27. 8. Ps. 19. 11. Luke 8. Mat. 28. 19 20. ● Cor. 9. 16 Pag. 79. Gen. 25. 23. 27. Mat. 20. 39 ▪ Vers. 23. Vers. 4. 1 Cor. 2. 11. 1 ▪ Thess. 5. 22 ▪ 23. Matth ▪ 13. Luk. 8. Deut. 9. 14. Ezek. 13. 9. Rev. 13. 8. Vers. 11. Rev. 15. 2. Math. ● . 1● . Eph. 1. 13. Rom. 3. 25. Eph. 1. 13. Pag. 80 ▪ 8. 1 Ephes. 1. 4. Rom. 5. 8. & 9. 15. Pag. 81. 8● ▪ Ier. 32 ▪ 40 ▪ Mat. 13. 23 Mat. 16. 18 1 Cor. 10. 13 1 Pet. 1. 5. 1 Ioh. 3. 9. 10. Pag. 82. 83 ▪ Ier. 32. 40. Ier. 25. 12 , & 29. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Pag. 38. 2 Sam. 12. 13 ▪ Psal. 50. Ps. 19. 12. Act. 16. 14. 2 Cor. 3. 6. 7 Pag. 84. Pag. 85. Psal. 95. 5. Es●● ▪ 53. 6. Pro● . 14. 22 Hebr. 3. 10. 2 Pet. 3. 17 , &c. Pag. 86. Vers. 28. Ioh. 3. 36. Pag. 87. Pag. 78. 80. 81. 82. 83. 85. 90. 3● , &c. Eph. 1. 4. 5. Rom. 5. 8. 10. Gal. 1. 15. Rom. 9. 11. Mat. 11. 25 Rom ▪ 3. 24. Gal 4. 5. 6. Rom. 8. 15. Eph. 2. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 25. 1 ▪ Cor. 10. 13. 1 Thess ▪ 5. 23. 2 Cor. 5. 14 Rom. 5. 5. 1 Tim. 1. 5. Pag. 88. 89 Vers. 25. 26 30. 3● . Pag. 90. 91 ▪ 92. 93. Rom. 9. 11. 15. 18. Rom. 7. 15. 17. 23. Pag. 90. Rom. 11. 30. 31. 26 27. Pag. 91. Prov. 26. 7. 9. Vers. 38. 39. 40. 41 , &c. Pag. 91. 1 Cor. 3. 4. Act. 16. 14 Ps. 5. 5 6. Pag. 92. 2 Cor. 6. 6. 7 Eph. 6. 13. &c. Rom. 6. 13. Pag. 92. 93. Pag. 93. 1 Tim. 1. 19 20. Chap. 2. 26. Chap 4. 1. 1 Ioh. 3 9. Math. 18. Math. 13. Ioh. 17. Rom , 11. 1 Cor. 10. 2 Tim. 2. Heb. 5. & 6 ▪ 2 Pet. 2 , with Iude. Notes for div A10833-e26410 Pag. 94. 95. Pag. 20. 21. Pag. 98. Pag. 96. Ier. 13. 23. Numb . 11. 25. 26. Iudg. 14 ▪ 5. 19. Ps. 51. 11. 12. Ezech. 11. 19. & 36. 26. 27. Luk. 1. 15. Act. 1. 8. & 2. 17. 18. Rom. 8. 9. 18. 26. 27 Pag. 95. Pag. 100 101. 1. King. 21. 26. Rom. 10. 17 2. Tim. 2. 25. Mar. 16. 20 Pag. 101. Pag. 102. Pag. 103. Pag. 103. 104. Pag. 104. Ioh. 6. 44. Pag. 104. Pag. 105. Rom. 5. 12. 15. Rom. 8. 3. Pag. 117. 119. Pag. 106. 107. Gal 5. 4. Ephes. 28. Rom. 7. 5. Rom. 1. 6. 15. & ch . 8 1. 8. 12. 13. Gal. 5. 17. 24. Pag. 107. 108. Ioh. 5. 1. Ioh. 3. 5. 6. 8 1 Pet. 1. 23. Ezech. 11. 19. Ier. 24. 7. & 31. 33. Ezech. 36. 27. Eph. 2. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 25 Pag. 109. Pag. 110. 111. 112. 2 King. 18. 25. Pag. 44. 45. 46. 47. Pag. 108. 109. 111. Mat. 11. 25 1 Cor. 1. 26. 27. Eph. 1. 18. Act. 16. 14. Ier. 31. 34. Notes for div A10833-e28830 Pag. 113. Vers. 12. Pag. 117. Rom. 8. 3. Rom. 7. 12. See Rom. 7. 17. 18 , &c. & Gal. 5. 17. Mat. 18. 4. & ch . 19. 13. 14. Mark. 10. 14. 15. 16. See : Com. pub . & private pa. 107 Vers. 6. Pag. 114. 115. Pag. 116. Pag. 116 ▪ Pag. 116. 122. Rom. 5. 12. 1 Cor. 15. 22 Rom. 5. 16. 21. Pag. 117. Rom. 2. 14. 15 ▪ Ezeeh. 18. 14. 15 , &c. Pag. 118. 119. Mark. 16. 16. 2 Thess. 3. 10. Pag. 119. Pag. 120. Pag. 120. 121. Pag. 122. 123. Pag. 123. Iude 7. Pag. 123. Math. 10. 28. Hebr. 9. 26 , &c. Eph. 1. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 6. Tit. 2. 14. Gal. 3. 13. 1 Cor. 15. 45 1 Cor. 1. 13. Pag. 126. Ioh. 1. 12. 1 Tim. 1. 5. Act. 15. 9. Pag. 127. Psal. 19. 13. Rom. 15. 4. Pag. 128. 2 Chr. 32. 17. Act. 17. 23 Pag. 128. Gal. 2. 20. Act. 15. 9. Rom. 4. 5. Heb. 11. 6. Rom. 14. 23. Notes for div A10833-e31600 Pag. 129. Act. 2. 38. 2 Tim. 2. 25 Pag. 129. 130. Relig. Com. Pag. 71. 72. Pag. 131. Math. 4. 10 Pag. 132. 133. Pag. 169. Math. 3. 11 Ioh. 1. 31. 33. 1 Cor. 14. 20. Rom. 2. 28. Act. 8. Gal. 2. 4. Iude 4. Tit. 1. 15. Pag. 134. ● Cor. 7. 10 Ioh. 3. 5 ▪ Pag. 123. Gal. 5. 17. Rom. 8. 10. 11. Pag. 123. Eph. 2. 3. Tit. 3. 5. Eph. 5. 23. 26. Eph. 44 5 Pag. 134. 135. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chapt. 3. 25 Mat. 21. 5. 43. Luk. 19. 12 14. Eph. 2. 19. Tit. 1. 15. Pag. 137. Rom. 11. Pag. 138. Math. 3. Ioh. 1. Pag. 140. 1 King. 18. 44. 45. Psal. 77. 18. Hebr. 11. 7. Pag. 142. Pag. 143. Relig. Com. pag. 88. 89. Pag. 134. 135. Pag. 123. Mat. 19. 14 Luk. 10. 13 & chap. 18. 15. Ioh. 4. 2. Pag. 145. Relig. Com. Gal. 3. 28. & 4. 10. Esa. 66. 21. Deu. 17 12 Ps. 101. 8. 2 Chro. 15. 12. 13. Gen. 17. 7. 10. Rom. 4. 11. Pag. 145. Relig. Com. pag. 90. 91. Pag. 146. 147. Rom. 7. 10. Lev. 18. 5. Gal. 3. 12. Rom. 4. 11. Gal. ● . 16. 17. 8. 9. Psal. 33. 12. Ps. 144. 15. Gal. 3. 3. vers . 11. ch . 5. 2. 3. 4. ch . 4. 21. 29 30. Pro. 26. 9. Pag. 147. Relig. Com. p. 76. 77. 78. Gal. 3. 17. 19. 10. 14. Ioh. 1. 17. Heb. 10. 28 29. Hebr. 9. 2 ▪ Cor. 3. 7. Heb. 7. 11 , & 9. 1. 2. 10. 13. Gal. 3. 11. 14. 16. 17. Rom. 4. 9. 10. 11. Pag. 148. Tit. 1. 15. Gen. 17. 7. 11. Rom. 4 , 11. 1 ▪ Sam. 17. 16. 36. Iudg. 14. 3. Ruth 1. 16 & 2. 12. Neh. 10. 28 Hebr. 11 6. Ioh. 7. 22. Relig. Com. p. 84 85 86. Math. 21. 43. 5. Gal. 3. 23. Hebr. 9. 16. 17. Ezech. 16. 4. 5. Gen. 45. 13. 14. 15. Math. 21. 31. 32. Ier. 31. 31. 32. 33 , &c. Rom 7. 8. Gal 3. 19. Hebr. 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. Pag. 149. 150 ▪ 151. Gen. 9. 9. 10 ▪ Rom. 4. 12. 16. Gal. 3. 6. 9. Gen. 15. 5. 6 , & ch . 12 3 , & ch . 18 ▪ 18. Rom. 4. 17. 18. Pag. 151. Rom. 4. 15 & ch . 7. 9. 13. Deut. 4. 37. & 7. 6. 7. 8 Psal. 33. 12 Lev. 26. 42. Luk. 1. 71. 72. Rom. 11. 25 26. &c. 2 Cor. 3. 6. 7. Rom. 4. 15. Gai. 3. 19. 20. Rom. 7. 9. Esay 5. 1. Ier 2. 21. Math. 21. 33. 34. Eph. 3. 6. Eph. 4. 4. 5. Relig. Com. pag. 62. 63. Pag. 152. Pag. 153. 1 Tim. 5. 17 ▪ Gal. 3. 26. 27. Rom. 6. 1. Cor. 12. 13. Heb. 6. 1. Cor. 12 13. Heb. 6 Acts 11. 26 Rel. Com. p. 47. 48. Pag. 156. Esth. 8. 17. Nehem. 10. 28. Ruth . 2. 11 Mat. 3. 5. 6 Ioh. 4. 1. Rev. 18. 1. Esay 13. 18 20. 21. & 21. 9. 10. Ier. 10. 2. 8 39. 40 , &c. Pag. 157. Ezek. 23. 8. Pag. 158. Gen. 34. Pag. 159. Iustificat . &c. pag. 390. 391. &c. 2 Chron 30 18. 19. 20. 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. 23. & ch . 12. 28. Pag. 161. Esay 40. 3. Mal. 4. 5. 6 Luk. 1. 11. 13. 14. 15 , &c. Mat. 11. ● . Iudg. 9. Pag. 161. 162. Pag. 102 ▪ 163. Gal. 1. 1. 1 Cor. 1. 9. & ch ▪ 4. 9. Pag. 163. Act. 2. 38. 1 Cor. 4. 15 & 9. 14. Iam. 1. 18. 1 Pet. 1. 23 1 Tim. 3. 2. 1 Tim 5 ▪ 17. Ephe. ● . 11. Rom. 12. 5. 7. 8. Col. 4. 17 Pag. 164. Rom. 12. 13 Vers. 8. Rom. 9. 4. Ps. 147. 19. Ioh. 7. 22. 1 Cor. 3. 1 Tim. 1. 3 Tit. 1. 5. Pag. 164. Act. 20. 17. 18. 19 , — 28 &c. 1 Pet. 5. 1. Pag. 165. 166. 1 Proof . 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. 23. Math. 18. 17. 18. 19. 20. Pag. 166. Pag. 168. 1 Cor. 1. 30 3 Proof . 4 Proof . Pag. 169. 1 Cor. 1. 5 ▪ 5 Proof . Pag. 169. Pag. 170. Math. 18. 19 ▪ 20. 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5 Proof . 6. Pag. 170. Pag. 161. Pag. 162. 1 Cor. 1● . 19. Pag. 172. Pag. 173. Lev. 6. 13. & 10. 20 , Pag. 174. Num. 4. 13 Num. 16. 3. 1 King. 7. 18. Rom. 4. 11 ▪