VER.. Rom.9. cleared. «,and feede ofvábraham. The Apoflle dcnieth the reafon on which . they thought their rejedion a thing which could not (land with the « immobility ofGods word. He anfwereth the affumption ofthelatter « fyllogifme, by diflinguifhingofIfrael and children ;. denying that all « Ifaelites are that Ifrad towhich Gods word belongeth ; or that all « csbrahams feede are thofe childrenwhom God adopted tohimfeife, « verfe 7. but fuch onely who were like /fide; Firfl,begotten by a word ofpromife, and partakers ofthe heavenly calling : The reafonis to be « conceived in this manner; The rejedting offuch,who ale not thetrue .< Ifrael, nor belongnot to thenumberof Gods adopted children, can- «not (hakeGods word, fpoken to Ifraeland Abrahams feede : But many « ofthe Ifraelitesand Abrahams feede, are fuch to whom the wordbe . longed not:Ergo, The wordofGod is firme,though theybe reje&ed. «This an' mption is propounded in the end of the fift and fixt verfs. Secondly; It is proved to the fourereenth verfe.Here Arminius having prefuppofedthis word thewordof the legali covenant,and this rejec- tion of fuchas fought righteoufneffe in the Law; he thus takethup « the argument. Ifthe ward reffeel the children ofpromife, then it afrme, though the childrenoftheflefh are rejetled :B at it concerneth children ofthe promt fe, thatis, beleevers ; Ergo, it it [afe, thoughjufilciaries, cbil- siren ofthefief!; be rejelied. "But this affumptionis towordofit inLafrminitta his fenfe,here ex- " preffed : For though children of the fle(h in fome other Scripture, « doth note out jufliciaries, feeking falvation in the Law, yet herethe « literati meaning is to be taken ; achilde ofthe flefh being fuch a one «whodefcendeth fromAbraham according to the flefh ; for it is molt plain, that thefe did make them thinke themfelves within the corn. « pafleoftheword, becaufe theywere Ifraelites and the feedeof,lbra. 9 ham, in regard ofbodily generation propagated from him; and "minims doth decline that, in objeéting and anfwering which this «difcourfe confrfleth..Befide that, though the fonnes ofthe flefhmay « lignifie fuch, who carnally, notfpiritually conceiveofthe Law, yet « the feedeofAbrahamwithout anyadjoyned, is never fo taken. The « affumption which is to be proved, is this ; That manyof Abrahams " feede, are fuch to whom the word belongeth not : The wordwhich « belongednot to Ifmaeland Efau,but to Ifaac and Jacobonely,and fuch « aswere like to them, that word belonged not to many ofthofe who pr" e the feede ofAbraham,and Ifraelites : But theword fhewing Gods ve, choife, adoption,blefïing of Ifrael, andAbrahams feede, belong- " ednotto Efau, ifmael, and fuch as they were, but to Ifaac and Jacob. «Here vlrminius having thofe legali jufliciaries, thus gathered his « fyllogifine. IfmadandEfau were typesoffiscb asfoughtjuftice in the Law:Ifma- eland Efauwererejetled ; Ifaacmac reckonedin thefeede ; Ifaac was atype ofthechildrenofthepronsife ; Ergo, the children ofthepromife are thefide. Ifmael was not in.the feede, but Ifmadetas a typeofall who
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=