oppugneth not Gois . lolineff. Peter notwithffanding -his Predeflination might have been damned if he had volunta- rily continued inhis impenitency, and Idas notwithffandiug his Reprobation might have been faved if he had not voluntarily continued in his impenitency. The abfolute decrees of Elelion and Non-eleCion are not contradictory to the general! condition- all promifes of falvation or threats of da- mnation. As therefore we condemne the opinion of the Remonflrants, who by re- ducing Elehiion and negative Reprobation unto forefeengoodand bad adsofmen erre upon the one hand, fo we condemne alto their opinionswho confound the decree of Damnation with this of Non-eletion, or who derive the carafes of damnation, name- ly finne, infidelity, impenitency, from the fore-named decree; which is to erre further upon the other hand. Thefe things premi- fed we will now go along with this Au- thour, and fee how he proveth this abfolute Reprobation or Non-ele6tion which we de- fend to oppofe any ofGods- principal! At- tributes. He faith it ß hteth with his haliw be- caufe it ;waked) him the principal) cauje of(inne in all perfons not-eluted or not- predeftina- ted. If he can prove this we yield. His nib- blingat the SynodofDort,.ndcharging them with 2ß.T
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=