(Ì91 ) You reply, If there be jufiifying works, how faith Paul truer I anfwer. This is a molt evident Petitio principii. It is uncle- !liable that lames includeth worksunder fomenotion.: and that Paul e,cleth them under fomeother notion : now therefore I might well ask, How faithJames true elfe ? Becaufe my fup- pofition cannot be denyed : But you fuppofe that Paul exclu- dethworks under anynotion,( which is the very Queftion, and isdenyed. ) When you ask howfaith Paul true? Paul faith true becaufe he fpeaks ofworksaridly taken,as is by himfelf explain- ed : lames could not fay true, if works under every notion ( as you fay) be excluded. Next you come to reconcile them by expounding lames where you fay, FaithWhich .in refpeti of its AEI ad intra, only ju/lifoes, yet it works ad extra : fides qua viva,non qua viva. I anfwer. Whats this to the (Illation ? The Qeftion is not whether Faith work ? Nor whether Faith juftifie ? Nor what Faith juftifieth ? But in what fence 7:mes faith, we are juftified by works, and not by Faithonly ? You anfwer-by adirer con- tradietion to 7arosec, (if I- can reach the fenceof your Anfwer) Paying, It is by Faith only, and that not as it liveth, &c. So dare notI direly fay, it ù not byworks, when God faith it if : but think I am bound todiftinguifh, and_íhew in what fence works juftifie, and in what not;and not to fay flatly againít God, that we are not jcsflifcedby works under any notion, but only by theFaith which worketh. A denyal of Gods Affertions is an ill expoundingof them. Towhat you fay ofthe judgement of the Orthodox, [ that they go cadets, via etfi non eadenofetnita] I anfwer, you may un- derftand your diftinttion as you please, butI have ¡hewed the difference : fome - underftand it of juítification before God ; others before men, &c. And if you pleafe tomake the way wide enough, you may take me among the Orthodox, that go eadem via : if not, I will Rand out with James. Whenyou fay_ [they exclude Works under any notion in the ail ofjuffificatien.] I anfwer, i.Your felfinclude them as antece- dents and concomitants. (though I do not,) Z. I have (hewed before that Lin the act, &c.] is ambiguous. If you mean car 4gentl or Caufes], fo do I exclude them. If you mean [ at .conditiotss
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=