'13z Ephefzl<nr,Chap.r. VVER.rI. doenot wittingly and wilfully fin againft God from thevoluntarycoun- fell ofit:Ergo,as Godwill havethe end, fo heecannot will the creature (hall fin,otherwife then from the wilful! defedìibility ofit. Argumenta. To the fecond I anfwer, denying thepropofition Godmay willan occafion of manifefting his jult wrath, or cite hecannot will the de monftratiòn of his owne perfediions : but to fly God cannot effect the (how of this or that perfection in himfelfe, is over-harfh and un- befeeming the power andwifdome oftheAlmighty: He who hath the creature fo in his power that hecannot make defection further then he willeth, he muff needs will the being of that which his jufticefhall punifhbefore it can come to be : yea, it is fowith men, that fometime they doe draw this or that fad from another, with which they are juftly angry fo farreas to punifh it in theoffenders. Thus a wafter draweth forth the unfaithfulneffe of a fervant : Of which fomewhat more in the laft argument. This maybe retorted. That which maketh God unable of himfelfe to Phew his perfedtions, isnot true :But that which faith he cannot ordaineor willthe beingoffinne, maketh him unableofhimfelfe to (hew his revenging juftice;ergo, it is abfurd. Argument 3. The fecond part of that third Argument is denied : It is one thing to make mankinde in fome part capable of life; another thing to will and intend it fhould all attaine life : This latter was never in God ; But God Paid, doe thi and live. This doth (hewwhat God would have the creature take as his will, not what was his fecret will within himfelfe:or it (hewedwhat waythe creature might attaine life, both for himfelfe and his fcede; But it doth not Phewthat Godhad this will withinhimfelfe,that his creature fhould with effedt performe this,for then he would havewroughtit in his crea- ture; even as the threarning doth not Phew that it was Gods final! pleafurewithin himfelf that wefhould all lye indeath,ifthat we finned. LArgument 4. The fecond part is again denied : Togive a commandement tomy creature, to doe rhis or thar,which I amminded within my felfe he Thal notdoe,is no untruth,when it is not fortodeceive,bur for trial! orother- wife:As in Abraham,offer thyfenne ifaak,yet Gods will was not to have him offered : the command, ergo, doth not lay downe what was Gods will within himfelf;for thefe were contradictory in the Divine will,ifhe fhould be Paid towill in himfelf at thefame time, and not ro will with- in himfelfthe offeringof lfaak: Thus here itis no untruth forGod to fig- nifie this as his will toAdam,that hefhould doe unto life that in charge, when it was not his will to have him with effedt performe it ; and looke as God in his threarning did fignifieas his finall will, thatwhich was not his finali pleafure touching mankind, without any untruth; fo here. Argument g. The fecond part is denied, we doe not affirme thefubftradtion ofany grace
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=