VER.II, Ephefiaru,Chap. t. t;t alike inthe finnewhich his creature in innocency may fallinto, as it is in regardofthat fin which he may fall into whennow he is forftate finful. 7. God may furnifh forth his creature , fothat he mayper fe, and yet may per accidens, make defection, and he may will that his crea- ture !hall fin, being fuffered to it felfe,by accident of it own libertyand vertibility. 8. Or having made his creature, fo that when he may obey, he will in fuchand fuch circumftances take occafion and willingly andwittingly fin;God may decree to fet him in fuch conditions inwhich he will fin, and leave himwithout puttinganyimpediment,which ineffe& is to will that fin fhall be by his permiflion. g. God may doe that which may direétly bring a (inner to commit finne,as he may finite himwith blindneffe in underftanding:for as death bodily is a good ferne inthe nature finfull ofthings, though not good to a living perfon, fo is this blindneffe, pronity to finne, hardneflè of heart, good in themfelves,though not good to man, who fhould be conformable to the Law, and free from them ; good as iniliéted, not as contracted and received.Secondly; God may fufpend all a&ions which in any degree tend to hinder.Thirdly ; God mayprovoke by occafions of finningnot onelyPet things, which he may take occafion topervert. The reafon of all is, it were juft with God to confummate fpirituall death uponhis creaturenow finfull, andErge,much more lawful! to ex- ecute fuch a degree as is inferiour. Thefe Conclufions premifed, the Arguments ufed for defenceof the negative part, may be more eafilyanfwered, then many ofthofe for the affirmative. Argument r. To the firft, it is denied that it is either cruelty or injuftice in God to ordaine that the creature !hall fall through it owne . wilfull defection, and fo glorifie his juftice in deferved punifhment : to conftraine the creature and make it finne unwillingly,and yet to determine to punifh it, were to punifh it without cattle, as delighted withcruelty. Secondly ; I anfwer , as much may be obje&ed againft their permiffron:Thatwhich is cruelty and injuftice, not befalling favage men, that is far from God ; But to Pet his childe, never having offended him, in fucha taking, in which hedoth feehe will certainelymake away himfelf ;and notto hin- der himwhen he might every way as well doe it,and that with (peaking a word, is crueltyand injuftice, farre from favage men. Now all this, different Divines confeffeof God.Firft, that he did Pet him,being every wayyet innocent, in fuchcircumftances. Secondly ; that he could have hindered him by fuggefting fome thoughteffe&uall to that end. Third- ly ; that if God had thus hindered him, mans will f could have beene no idle free, and Gods primary purpofe fhould have beene more promoted. Fourthly; that Goddetermined, notwithftanding all this, he would permit him fall: Revenging juftice cannot be glorious but in juft puniflnnent ; juft punifliment cannot be, where there is no juft meriton the creatures parts; juft merit there can benone,if the creature doe
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=