Cap.! 3. and the Covenant ofGrace. 89 on drawn from filch premifl'es : Then Chrifl was no ±Authour eternal fal ation, as Heb, 5.9. but only the publifher; he_ was meffenger from God, in the dayes of his Beth, but no Saviour man; he did not redeeme us with a price, but only made known that we were fo farre in the love of God from eternity that n. redemption needs. Secondly I fay, Gods purpofe of a thin loth n,t put it in being; he takes his own way to bring about i time, that which he purpofed before all time ; Al! that is done even every work under the Dunne was alike from eternity in th purpofe of God, Known unto God are all hit works from the be ginning of the world. At`is 15. i 8 So the houfe that was built this day, was built from eternity ; The childe that was borne this day, was borne from eternity ; we may as well fay that the elei were glorified from eternity,lo that they need to look after no o- ther glorification, as to fay they are ;unified from eternity. All the works :of God were in his purpofe from ever , who fees all things at once: and not as we can comprehend them in their re- fpecive fucceflion ? But we enquire after things as -they are in themfelves, and not as they are in Gods purpofe. Thirdly, Some fay,juflificátion can be no ocher then an ad of God from eternity, being an immanent acs, and not a tranfien~. Tranfient ads are in time done, in the junciure of time when God pleafes to do them, but immanent ads of God are from e- ternity. To which; firfi anfwer, That it is not without danger for us to bring the a&ions of God under our examination , and there fix School- notions upon them, according to which they muff be bounded, when ,as Mafter Borges well observes) ire are here in meere darknefe, and not able to comprehend how Gocl ù ¡aid to acl or wo i Treatife of Juffification, page 166. How much more fafe were it for us to learn ,i po /teriore from the mouth of God in 'criptures, what his ac`fions are, and the order how he works, then à priore to conclude that they are thus and thus, and therefore thus of neceflity he muff work. Yet if we may be fo bold as to look into this aìì of bis, and take it into con- federation , according to this notion we may farre rather con- clude that ;unification is an ac`fion tranfient, not immanent. e4n Immanent anion (as the Schooles tell us) is terrn:nated within the fubjett, and Work' no read nor evident cha!ge out of it: and inflance in our conceptions of and refolutions about things, Keelerm ?n, f a of.. e 0 g n e Objec`t, Anfit, 'a rearm eq. t-v cic,!iQrY t331Y- t trinfÉetis nut- lztn infert..
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=