Baxter - Houston-Packer Collection BT70 .B397 1675

add Decrees of god, &c. mans reach to know themode of Divine, intellef ion, more than above the reach of a bird or beaft to know the mode of ours. But as v-c may more eafily and fafely diftinguihand denominate Gods Knowledge áimo the obje ls, fo we may well fay, i. That he knoweth not that Creature m exift in nunc temports which doth not foexift. z. And that effe G-olatúri is not effe exiftens. And therefore to know the former is not formally to know the latter. t ag. Yea it is here difputedWhether there be indeed any contingency or not ( which the Doctrine of Hobs and the Dominican Predetermi- nants n.uit needs exclude, which make all events, to he necetlitated by God ). The Reafons againft it are , i. Whatever God fore-knoweth muff neceffarily be ; but he fore -knoweth all that will be : ergo 2. All things future are from eternity determined in Gods will to one, partof thecontradiElion : ergo necefario crime. 3. All the acts of the Creatureswill is to be done, by the phyfical efficient neceffitating infupera- ble predeterminationof God the firft caufe : ergo, there is no place in fuch neceffity for contingency ( which is apofe tender(ad effe velnon effe.) 130. Many and different anfwers are given to there, and thofe of the Thomifts and Dominicans are moftly fhuffling and vain : But plainly and briefly, r. Gods fore-knowledge, 2. And his nicer will, whenthey are not joyned efficiently with power, or a will de rfficiendo, do no whit at all Caufe or neceffitate the effect or event, or panere aliquid in objeclo. It is only a Logical"necejtar confequentrte in ordine probandi that arifeth from them, which confifteth with contingency, andnot a phylical neceffity in,ordine effendi as from a caufe, called confequentis, or effecti. And, 2. Gods Knowledge andwill rather prove contingency ; For he doth not only know and will bar futurum, but hoc contingenterfuturum : There- fore it willbe. 3. And the tall argument from necetating predetermi- nation I (hall elfewhere confute, and thew their contradiction who fay that God doth predeterminethe thing contingently to come to pals. x3 t. But it cannot be denyed but that Gods will is from Eternity de- termined about every contingent event : And therefore that Neceftate exiftentia the determination of it is eternally neceffary : And therefore that whichwe call its Liberty is but theperfect manner of its determina- tion, as Bradwárdine confeffeth. 132. But what is all this flit about ? The great bufinefs of all is to (hew how God fore- knoweth fin. For faith R4da, its ea/le ( from Gods Volition) to fhew how he knoweth things that are not fin but bow knoweth he fin frometernity, feeilg this was never in effe volito ? And here the way of the Scotitts proveth utterly infufficient. Dr. Twife and Rutherfordand force Dominicans fay, that God fore-knoweth it, becaufe he Decreed to Caufe all the Entityof the Ad with all its circumftances from which the form Of fin is but a refulting relation. But this fub- verteth Religion. Rada ibid. and Tiwifs oft fay, he Dccreeth topermit it, ( and that it (-hall come to pats ipfo permittente, faith Twill':) Ö rye per- mafo (faith Rada) non accipitur in communi, fed pro eo quad eft per- mittere de facto deficere e)' in peccátaant ruere fitbtrahendo ef£cacia auxilia quibus p fitis non foret peccatum, auare hat eft bona confe- quentia quantum ad illatianem prcteife ; Deus permit9 aliquempeccare hie nunc defacto : ergo, peccat: ergo, valet confèquentia, Deus voluit ab aterne permettereut Perrai peccaret de facto talc E tali occaane oblata : ergopeccábit : Dixi quantumad illationempraecife. Zola quantum adCau- falitateen ,non ell bona ilia confequcntiax. But to pars by their fuppofition ofGodsknowmg confequences by argumentation,i hailconfute all this anon. 133. And Read tic di(-pure of Pet. Alit. m. t. q. tha 3. R. S. and Gro- garles and Okras and his own opinion, about the potSbility of Gods not knöwing what he know- eth, and that it is in the power of the Creatureto flake God not to have known them, and much more (batlike. I confefs I tremble to read ( not the fal;aoad but) thebold - net? and prefumption of filch difpntes, as fearing they areprophase. Vid. D'Orbeltis. in'r. d. 38. dub. ntur. and ((Faith Dr. t.Bo Tmavei/i) all the Sclioohrienfay the faule. Ibid. at. 3.f. 503: Vid. r. d. 36. q. r.a. ai Bana, ib. 9.1. a. 9. Do- tard. ib. q. r. ca¡et.sa>- ne, , Zumel. Ripa,Gontal. Ytoli%t. Yáfg'ue Arrub. Fafal. p. q. i 4. a. IÓ. Tanner. I. p. dic'J. 2. g. 8. dub. 8. Granad. Id Q. Cont. 4. L. rbid. art. 3 f. 903. MVid Ruie de jeoent di 17. Gr.Valent. p. t. di r"b. t. 9. 14 Wit. 7. Ala, coo. i. p. tr. 2. dq. 3 6"4

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=