89 / 808
V
E13:5,
Rom.
9.cleared.
he not have power
to
ordaine
them to this end, whom
in fo
juif man-
ner, and upon
fo
good
confiderations he bringeth
unto!
&c.
In an-
fwering
thefe,
lrminito
feemeth very accurate, but it
is
a
wily
dili-
gence ; fuch
as
chofe
poore creatures
ufe,
which
being hard befet
will run
round often,
and
fetch running- jumps,
that by
this
meanes
they may bring to
a
loife
all
that
purfue.
To
leave him
therefore
in im-
pertinent difcourfe,what
I can
gather
out
of him,touching thefe words,
refpedtethone
ofthefe
three things:
r
.The
occafion which
went
before,
God
bordneth
whom he
will,as
he
jheweth
mercy
to whom he
wa
á.T
he ob-
jedtion. 3.
The
anfwer.
Let
us
begin with
the
firfl,for
ifyou
marke
the antecedent
in
the
fenfe
Arminius
taketh
it,it
wil
not
beare the objedlion following.
Secondly,If
the objection could be made, yet
Saint
Pauls
anfwer would proveim-
pertinent
;
the antecedent occafion, Arminius marl underftand
of
Gods
decreeing
to harden, or
adlually
hardning
,
according
to
his
decree
:
His decree
is,
I will deny
thee mercy, harden thee,
punifb
thee,
if
through
unbeleefe,
and
impenitency thou
(halt make
thy
fenfe
worthy
:
His
adtuall
hardning
is a
powerfull executing this punifhment
of
induration,
and
rejedìing,
on him
who
hath
by
finals
impenitency
defervcd it
:
neither
of
thefe will beare
his
objection, with
Phew
of
reafon.
And
becaufe Arminius feemeth rather
to
refpe&
the decree,
we
will take up
that,
and joyne this murmuring
objeûion
with it.
If
I
am
hardned
by Gods
decree ,
which doth
fee
downe the hardning
and rejedling
of
all fuch
who
(hall
by
finall unbeleefe and
impenitency
provoke him
to
it, then
hath God
no reafon
to be
angry
with
me, on
whom
this fentence
is
executed
by
his unrefiftible will
:
But
I
am
hard-
ned
according
to that decree. Takethe antecedent
in
the other
fenfr;
If
God
now
in
his
wrath execute induration on me, having
deferved
it
bymy
finali
impenitency,and
that
with
fuch
power that
I cannot
refiff
him, then bath he no
caufe
to
be angry with me,
who
am thus hardned
by
his
almighty power. I
doe appeale
to
any confcience,
what
fhew
of
reafon
there
is,
inferring fuch
a
confequence on fuch antecedents.
No,
had
Gods
will beene,
not abfolute within
himfelfe,
but
refpedting con-
ditions
meritorious
in
the creature,
or
had his induration beene
a
meere
inferring
of
punifhment now
deferved,
and not
a deniall
of
mercy
which
fhould have
removed the entrance
of
the other,
( which
the
oppofition
teacheth to be meant by induration) then there
had beene
no
Phew
of
reafon
thus to grant
againft
God.
But
come to the objedlion:
He conceived
in
it
thus
much,
as
if
it fhould fay,
Can
Gods
indura-
tion caufe him
to
be angry
againff
us
who
are
hardned !
Can that
which
is
the
effedlof
his
unrefiflible will,caufe him to be
angry with
us
juftly
Firt,
the Apoftlechideth
this infolency, fuggefting
the
{late
ofthe
per
-
fon
murmuring,
and
the
perfon
of
God
againft
whom
it
is
murmured.
Secondly, from comparifon, well having thus repelled
it,
he
defendeth
the equity
of
God,and
anfwereth
to
the matter.Firfl
in
the
z.verfe.
H.
who
hath power to
decree
the
life
and death
of
his
creature
on force conditions,
and
fo
to harden
force,
and thew mercy
H3
to
17