Predestination HANDLED and MAINTAINED, AGAINST Papists, Arminians, and certain Churches also of Antipaedobaptists, who with much zeal, and industry, impugn the same. By HENRY LAVOR. He calleth things that are not, as if they were. When He appointed the Foundations of the Earth, than was I by Him, as one brought up with him, rejoicing always before him, etc. and my delights were with the Sons of men, Prov. 8. vers. 29, 30, 31. Published by Authority. London, Printed by I. Coe. 1646. HAving perused this ensuing Dissertation, wherein the Author (without provoking Language) judiciously opposes a reviving and groaning dangerous error, I do therefore appoint it to be made public. june the 20. 1646. Joseph Caryl. Predestination handled and maintained etc. THE reviving and vigorous Errors of these days, General Redemption. Free will. too miserably heard asserted, and maintained, from the mouths of some of those, who even pretend to greater devotion; abetted also with the confident suffrages, and earnest acclamations of their Audients not a few, have somewhat prematurely hastened to the birth, these our newly conceived meditations; which should else have tarried for a more elaborate, and exact Recension. Howsoever, we hope, there's none will reprehend; when he may, with us, consider, this may prove also an occasion to others more able, of appearing in this same defence. And so pass we to the intended matter, that is, Predestination: touching which, for our more orderly progress, we begin our discourse from its definition: which, in the sense we use it, may thus be form. Predestination then is Gods designing, and appointing severally, before time, a certain number of persons, to grace, and glory; and that absolutely and of simple love to them. That this designation is before time, is expressly by the Scriptures intimated: as, he hath chosen us in him, before the Foundation of the World. Eph. 1.4. and 2 Tim. 2.9. etc. And that in the act of Predestination, God had before him, the certain distinct notions, & particular representations of all the Elect, i. e. of all men that are, or ever shall be glorified; is not only attested by the Scriptures, but by Reason also. And first, we allege Scriptures. Revel. 17.8. the words are these: And they that dwell on the Earth, shall wonder, whose Names were not written in the Book of Life, from the foundation of the World. Here what have we hinted, 4 Phil. 3.10. Lu. 20.13 Rev. 8. but a registry, or Catalogue of the names of the Elect? whose names were not written etc. And that before time: For in the occasionally, or accidentally intimating the negation of that privilege as to some, (a thing quite besides the Author's chief purpose) is evidently, and clearly employed, a Grant, and Concession thereof to some others. Again, Rom. 8.29.30. Whom he foreknew he also did Predestinate, etc. and whom he did Predestinate them he also called etc. Here, by foreknowing what is intended? If the word you will have taken in its vulgar, and ordinary sense, then will it follow, that all being of God foreknown, all likewise being accounted to the partnership of those glorious dignities, Sanctity, Glory, etc. which sure none of any reason will admit. Some to this word foreknew, would have adjoined, these words, [would believe] and that in a way of causing. Which whiles they conjecture, how unwarily skip they over a notable absurdity? For (by them) those same God foreknew would of themselves believe, he also makes to believe: unless they'll say believing, or faith is not, nor any part of vocation, and Sanctification: nor they of it, which were even to fly from a less unto a greater absurdity. We rather conceive the Author by that word, to intent Gods eternal love in Christ to his Saints, reflected upon by him with reference, and in order to those gradual inferences: which love so reflected on, appeared like a Crown, intituling those that wore it, to the Royal Preeminences, Calling, Sanctity, Glory. Nor do we want other Scriptures, many, that clearly own, and confirm out said interpretation; when the undoubted sense thereof doth plainly exact such an understanding of the questioned words, as we have delivered. GOD hath not cast of His People, whom He foreknew, Rom. 11.2. and Mat. 25.12. I know you not. See 3 Amos 2. with many others. 'Tis evident then that knowing in the Scriptures Dialect, is put for loving: And as evident it is also, that Calling, Justification, Glorification in the foresaid place mentioned, do receive limits, Act. 2. last v. & 13.48 and measure from that foreknowing, or foreloving: which is in the text assured us, by that often repeated Relative, whom. Those He foreknew, He predestinated, called etc. Those and no others; Those and no more. Which seeing 'tis so, then vain and inconsiderate is that opinion of many, who think the number, and persons of the foreknown, were to God in the said act of Predestination not determinate, nor severally considered; but that they lay deep sunk in the Abyss of obscurity, and confusion; either necessarily, or willingly by God so suffered to be: So as any one has in himself , and Power; by believing, to make himself of the number of those Foreknown. But to pass by this Error of theirs, we will add to this word foreknown, another of the same Apostles words used in the like matter & that is chosen 1 Eph. 4. an act likewise placed before all time: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 'tis in the Greek culled out. Now in choosing, or picking out as it were of some from out of others; is had a discering, and distinction, else 'tis no choosing, no Election, and where choosing is, there is also a taking out of some, a leaving of others. God then did take some for his Sons, and heirs of glory, did he not know them? who they would be? Psal. ●39. 15.16. how many? But he knew David's substance yet being imperfect, and in his book were written all his Members, when as yet there was none of them. If you will have this to be spoken of David's Person, even so it doth make much for us: If of the Elect, (as more probable) then much more; yea than it amounts to no less than a clear and plenary confirmation of the point we assert. Rom. ●. 11.12.13. He knew also Jacob and loved him yet unborn. Lu. ●. 15. He knew john the Baptist, jer. 2.5. and sanctified him in the womb. And jeremiah did he know before he form him in the belly, and before he came forth out of the womb, he sanctified him, and ordained him a Prophet, etc. All these you'll grant God did foreknow severally, See also 1 Gall 15. Act. 15.18. did he not also know the rest? But known unto God (saith the Apostle) are all his works from the beginning of the World. john 1.3. 1 Col. 16. Ephes. 3.9. Act. 4.24. Again, he formeth and maketh all things; witness the Scriptures: From whence we will infer he foreknew all things; For he does either make things rashly, and without precognition of their future Forms, or contrariwise: See Act. 4.28. but doubtless the latter; else shall we put the Creator beneath that perfection he has given his Creature: (for not man sets himself to operate, without having a prescript, or preconceived type, and pattern of the work he intends to.) And then this precedency of knowledge, to operation in God, was before time: for a Creature it is not, but it is in God alone, and so God himself, according to the Schoolmen; * whatsoever is in God, is God himself. Quicquid est in Deo est ipse Deus. And secondly, if this precognition was in God not eternal, then did there something from without, occasion and beget the same; (for God is one, simple, entire, and not mixed) and so it will follow, God is passable, imperfect; yea, the first Cause then, shall in a manner be the effect of a second; of its own effect; and so there will follow a confusion of Causes: which all are most absurd. The like may be said also of God's love to men severally, in reference to that of jeremiah, Chap. 31. Vers. 23. (I have loved thee with an everlasting love) if any would have it restrained to the future only. But an irrefragable place also to our purpose is, that in the Psalms, Psalm. 90. Vers. 1. Lord thou hast been our dwelling place in all Generations. Heb: From Generation, to Generation, the same in sense. What, would he be their dwelling place, so long, and yet not know them? doubtless no. We say again, if God did not severally know, eternally, the persons of those he preordained to life eternal, 'twas either because he would not, or because he could not. That we embrace not the former, the admirable love of God to them exhibited, more especially in the wonderful act of Redemption. dissuadeth: And the latter we now come to refute by reason. If God therefore did not know the precise number of his Saints, before the world made, and so upwards, than did he wait until he should be informed thereof, either from the events, and determinations of his own Actions, or else from some other Mind and Power, and this Mind and Power is either subordinate to God, or with him: If subordinate; (as necessarily) then simply and totally subordinate to him, or not: if not; then still must it be mounted into the throne of a Deity: but if simply, and totally subordinate, then did it, and doth receive of God the Precepts, forms, rules, and precise measures of all its actions: And other than such an Agent, (if yet even such a one) no man but sees God would not ordain, to so great a detraction, and blemish, and even emulation of his divine Sovereignty. (we speak of a Power procreative of those we call Natural and Substantial Forms, as such) Nor would we by any means admit of such a Preter-divine Agent, directly over the very persons, of men. What may be brought against us out of Genesis 1.11. And God said let the Earth bring forth grass, etc. Is limited to things vegitative only. The 24. verse, where it's said, Let the Earth bring forth the living Creature, etc. Is declared by that which follows, viz. And God made the best of the, Earth. etc. We then here find any Assignation, of delegation of such a Productive Power or Faculty, as to the form substantial, extended to man: whose supereminent Dignity is in the same Chapter pointed out in the words; Let us make man, etc. Nor (as for the other member) is God to deduce such a knowledge, from the events, and determinations of his own Actions: For than it may be truly to be said of Him, he's about to do he knows not how much: or he knows not the quantity of his own intended actions, which were doubtless absurd. It will then also be true, if one shall say at the period of humane Generation, or some short time before; Now knows God somewhat of his noblest Creatures, which before he was ignorant of. Nor may our discourse much stick at that Objection. What then (may some say) did God know before time every blade of grass that should be? every dust on the earth? etc. To step besides this block (which yet we could undertake to clear the way of) we answer: Our Treatise is of man; whom alone his Creator would have sublimed above others, by the Impress even of his own Resemblance: not of Plants or mere Animals: of Immortals not mortals, and amongst these, of the Saints principally: members of the Lords own mystical body: His Children, His Saints, etc. who, what if we should tell you, have a Seminal or radical being eternal: which though (as being a thing beside our scope) we shall forbear, yet is there enough said to mar the consequence, viz. from things inanimate or vegetative only, to Intellectives: from mortals, to immortals; and all this in a certain respect of Dignity also. Again, Whatsoever thing most excellent can incur into, or be devised by the Imagination of man, That ought we to believe to be in God, in some equal, or eminent manner; else would it prove to the disparagement, and indignity of the great Creator that he should have enabled his Creature to imagine that Excellency, which is not in Himself; which is above Himself. Now this numerical foreknowledge is easily by man both immaginable, and comprehensible. But Eternity, Infinitude are without all doubt attributed to God: either of them is greater than the contended for prescience of number: we grant him the former, how can we deny him the latter? So much for this point, wherein if we shall seem to any more prolix than is needful, let them have this answer. Both they that assent, may have now more ground so to do; and they that descent, may hereby of this their Error be the more fully convinced. And now pass we to the other branch of our Definition; namely, That the Predestination aforementioned was absolutely, and of simple love. Destination, or purpose (largely taken) is an act of the mind, begotten of the understanding and will concurring, and is related to something by the Person to be done. But this definition haply is too large for our purpose, which is to treat of such purposes, as are about things of more considerable moment, and consequence. We shall first therefore divide, and then describe them in more ample, and familiar terms. Purposes then are either more perfect, or less perfect; that is absolute or conditional. The more perfect or absolute are when the Person purposing, having projected or cogitated something to be done, and then rising up to a consideration, and pondering of things already happened, present, or for the future happenable, (to wit) events, cases, non-events, conditions, states of things; forcible and of importance, as to the destroying, or impeding of the thing purposed, doth at length sit down with a resolution to do or execute. The Imperfect or conditional are, when the mind, projecting or imaginating something to be done, and having made enquiry and estimation of all important and forcible impediments, as to the execution thereof, and then finding some possible but uncertain intervention, accident, defect, or state of things, or thing, that in the judgement of the Person purposing, aught to or will hinder & forbid execution, draws at length to this resolution that if this or that intervene, or this or that intervene not, the purpose shall proceed to execution. To prove that one word, (uncertain) to be that only, which gives being to the purpose conditional, as it is such; and that without this uncertainty, the purpose, if it proceed and abide, must needs be absolute, is an easy task: For why doth one yet purpose to do this or that, when he's well assured there hath been, is, or will be something that (in this particular) ought and will hinder its accomplishment? which cannot be. For example's sake, A Father purposes to give his son by will 100 l. on condition he please him well in the mean time. Here does the Father know or is he certain, that his son will so please him? or is he not certain? if he be certain, to what then serves the condition? (sigh default or defect in the condition must destroy the purpose) If he knows he will not so please him, and yet so purposes, than this is no more a condition, but the purpose may be, notwithstanding this, absolute and perfect. Hence therefore may we with clearness deduce this conclusion: That the reason why purposes are conditional is, a want in foreknowledge, or an uncertainty in the person purposing, of all such things as will and aught to destroy the purpose. So that it also follows to be inconvenient with the properties of God, to purpose, or predestinate conditionally: it being a thing clear that we ought to allow God such a foreknowledge, especially then too when he does intent to such one; as happeneth in the case of purposes or Predestination. Besides this, also it may be minded, that where a person purposeth or Predestinateeths to do any thing of free will, there the purpose partaketh something of desire to execution. God now is both an absolute purposer, and a desirous one too: then what is it can hinder him therein. Argument. But if the Predestination aforementioned, was caused by the foresight of Faith to come, (as is by many fancied,) then did the Predestinator foresee some unavoidable, and unfrustrable cause, or series, or order of causes necessarily productive of the faith foreseen: else how could it be that God should pass a certain act upon, or in reference to an uncertain, and unchangeable respect, or motive? which once granted, it is granted also that God may be deceived. If any say, this productive cause may be considered of God, though yet to come; such do but trifle: For there must then also be granted some preceding cause, equally certain and unfrustrable as to the producing of that; we have therefore added, as above, (Order of Causes.) Now where was this cause, or order of causes before the creation? It must needs be granted, it was in God alone. So then, the next and immediate cause of faith, Causa causae est causa causati. is but the remote effect of this its first cause. Argument. If the same that decreed glory to man, decreed also to work in him faith and grace, than glory depends not really upon the preceding habit of faith. But the former is true: Therefore the latter. Antecedent proved, Rom. 8, 29.30. Eph. 1.4.5.11, etc. Here me thinks it is by some objected: Though Glory to man simply, depend not upon having of faith: Yet quoad hunc, as concerning this or that particular man, it may depend on his having of faith. Answ God did then decree glory. To whom? Doubtless to those that are, or shall be saved. But it is proved above, God knew them severally and all, before they were existent. It will follow then, that God afore decreed glory directly to the several persons of men: For the indeterminatenesse of all purposes, is of defect of knowledge, as above more at large. Argument. That which is not of Man, but is freely the gift of God, cannot, as such, be a motive, or impulsive to God, of conferring another gift; especially that may as much exceed the former, as infinite doth finite. But faith is not of Man, but is the gift of God. Ergo, Faith, etc. There is no ground here from which to fix on God an obligation: If affectation you suggest, that is impious, nor can you with any colour of reason, fly to the merit of the gift. This for the Major. The Minor is proved, Eph. 2.8. compared with Rom. 3.24.36. EZek. 22.26.27. Phil. 2.13. Argument. If we are saved freely, than not upon condition. But we are saved freely, Ergo etc. The Minor is proved by the two last cited places, Ephes. and Rom. Argument. Those things that are equally related to God, as being their Author, and are the next and immediate effects of the selfsame cause, cannot properly be said to be the cause, or effect one of the other. But such are Faith and Glory. Ergo. For proof of the Minor, turn to Rom. 8.29, 30. Eph. 1.4, 5. & 2.8. Rom. 6. ult. jam. 1.17, 18. with many others. Where you read both conformity to the Image of Christ, vocation, justification; and glorification as proceeding of the same cause, viz. foreknowing, i. e. foreloving. There also have you faith called the gift of God; so likewise, eternal life. Argument. That, according to which men are saved, was before the world began. But faith was not before the world began: Ergo, faith is not that, according to which men are saved. The Major proved, 2 Tim. 1.9. the words these: Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy-calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose, and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the world began. Argument. If Glory proceed from Divine love, as the only cause, and that freely; then is Faith neither the cause (whether social or solitary) nor condition of glory. But the former is true, therefore the latter. That love is the only cause, may hence be demonstrated. Where good, as good, is destinated to a proper and ultimate object; It is either so destinated from some engagement, obligation, or respect of merit, or else out of pure love. But on God lay no engagement, or obligation of predestinating good to man. Whence should it arise? He was then alone. If you allege the very purpose itself, what caused such a purpose? Was it not love still? Nor is there much merit to be found in the Object, Man: of whom the person that predestinated, beareth witness, that Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Isaiah also acknowledgeth, that All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, etc. chap. 64. v. 6. Well then might Paul say, Rom. 3.24. Being justified freely, etc. Yea, and God pronounces, I will love them freely, Hos. 14.4. Argument. For which Objects sake simply, God had ordained, and to which he properly did refer the greatest accident possibly, the highest demonstration, and most excellent instance of his love could be given. To that Object, it is incongruous, yea, absurd to affirm; He would think much, and refuse to add also a gift of much lesser value freely. But for man's sake God hath done the precedents, viz. in the Redemption. Ergo, etc. And this is in substance, the very Argument of the Apostle himself, Rom. 8.32. where he saith: He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all: how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Argument. To whom God intended the bestowing of a gift, for durance, eternal; for degree, most excellent: to them he did also intent to give a temporal, and far less excellent gift; being yet such as ought necessarily to antecede the other. But to some men God intended the precedent, (glory we mean:) Ergo, the consequent also: Inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world, Matth. 25.34. This Kingdom is afterwards called, Life eternal, vers. ult. Thus than you have it cleared to you from our foregoing dissertation, First, (to wit) That God before time knew the future persons severally, of all those (without exception) that are or shall be glorified. Secondly; that Gods conferring of glory to the same persons, is, and was free, and absolute, without having respect to any thing (as thereunto requisite) in, of, or for them. By the first, is refuted that opinion, according to which, even those (all or some) who are dead, and * For they hold not of suffering hell's torments, till after the day of judgement. reserved for everlasting woe, might, and had power to have believed, and consequently been saved eternally. For doubtless, such as are reserved for hell, were never known of God, as being in the number of those he ordained to glory, or accounted for such. By the 2d Conclusion appears the falsity of their other opinion, namely: That God preordained no man to life eternal, without respect to, and forsake of his future believing. So we end. FINIS. Page 14. line 22, for then here, read not where.