Baxter - Houston-Packer Collection BT70 .B397 1675

---------- 104 Ofthe Nature, IÇno, ledge, Will 6 i 8. Pag. z97. Again he is at it, Boutin e, fe ut fins mala : bo- som eft utDeus finem fibi prafaxtim affequatúr : At hoc fine intervento mali b peccati nullo modopoteft. Repl. z. Ít is not per peccatum ut medium, though not fine peccato: 2. Interventus therefore implyeth a fal(hood. For in effe cognito fin is antecedent or prefuppofed to the way of glorifying fuftice and Mercy up. on Goners; linnets are the objet : And confequently you muff take it ( as before proved ) for antecedentto the Volition or fimultaneous. 6ig. He urgeth, oportet harefes effe, ut qui probati front manifèflt fiant. 4nfw. That neither meaneth that men ought to be Hereticks, nor yet that God lovetb, willeth or approveth that there be herefies : But only, z. God decreeth to manifefr the difference between the found Ghriftians andthe reft : 2. And heforefeeth that there will be heretics. 3. There- fore he decreeth to try them by the occaflon of thole herefes which he forefeeth ( and hateth. ), The fame is the cafe of all tryal by perfecuti- ons : AndGod willeth not thefin of alive perfecution, but only the', of-, tea or paffive part, So that the oportet (by your own confeffion of it ) fignifieth no more than a Logical necellitas confequentie , which fore; knowledgewithout volitionwill inferr. 6ao. He addeth [Obj. It fuffaceth that Godpermitfin; (ànd not will it) Refp. But either the exency of fin infallibly followeth the Per miffìon of it, or not: 7fnot, Gods Intention may be frufirate Tf yea, what matter is it, Whether Godwill that fin¡ball be, hepermitting, orfa permit it as that infallibly it will be ,? fo we obtain either of there; it's all one to oar taufe ofpredeflination.] Repl. z..If it be all one-, take up with that agreement,. and, make-nó further difference with them that. grant youenough. ì. In cafe of vehe ment Inclination to a fin, , it would follow upon Gods total permiffron but God never totally permiteethfiin.) But in other cafes, it will nor follow : that is, It is not agood confequence , that This or that fan will be done, becaufe God loth no more tohinder it, than that which Come- time hindereth it not. And yet GodsIntention is not fruftrate: For fin will infallibly come to pals , from its proper caufe, which God fore- knoweth: And theconfequence is good from his fore-knowledge. And is not that all one, as to the certainty ofGods intentions e 3. You phrafe it as if fin followed Gods permiffion, as a deficient caufe, or as that which cannot be otherwife, unlefs God domore to hinder it, and fo were neceffary thence neceffitate confequentis (or asothers call it neceffitatean- tecedente ) which is falfe, and oft denyed by your Pelf. 4. The very truth is, Permifsion is a word of fo great ambiguity and laxity, as re- lating to fo many forts of Impedition, that it is but delufory without much diftinguilhing, tofayfan will or will not follow it. If you reftrain it to a non t ficaciter impedire, as is ufual, it taketh not away the ambi- guity much. For Rill theqqueftion is, Whatmull make it efettual, unlefs you call any impedition effebtual meetly ab eventu, whatfoever it be in it felt. 62x. He faith that the liniverfe would not be perfel?, if there were perfect holinefs and no fin, and fo no pardon or punifhment. But he gtveth us no proof, butconfident affertion, at all. I need not fay, that It would bemoreperfeel if there were nofin; It fufficeth me to fay, that It would be as perfelt : And fo that it is not Neceffary to the Worlds perfeoìion, that there be fin orHell. God could have freely willed the contrary. AndGods Goodnefscould have been as fully manifelled if it had