oveythra v the Not Gods lufiuie. reafon, which chargeth God with inju1lice If God ftrike a petty finner prefently and fpareagrand ¡inner till he be old in wicked- neffe, fuffering him to do much mifchief, and knowing that he will do much mifchicf if he be fpared, neither the fudden firiking of the leffer finner nor the longer fearing of the greater is contrary toDivine juftice : and yet fuch dealing is not according to the rúle of humane civil juftice allowable. Secondly, this man is deceived, in fuppo- fing the Juflice of God ( which is to do no- thing contrary to the goodnef e of his own nature) to be fuch a rule as refiraineth him, ifhe will be jufl inhis dealings,to onepart of the contradi6ion. The rule ofjuflice which tiethmen to do juflly, is fuch a rule as íhew- eth them unjuft when they do otherwife. But ( as I noted formerly) in things where there is no exprefle covenant or promife on Gods part,ifhe fhouldprat:emit that which he doeth, and do that which he pretermit_ teth, if he fhould deal more mercifully with this man then he Both , or more feverely with that, there were no injuftice in it, no- thing unbefeeming the Divine goodneffe Impoílible therefore it is to reduce Gods juftice in his decrees or ads to the roles of reafon or humane juflice; fiance when thefe judge a decree or an ation to hold fquare 'vvth the rule of juftice,they judge the preteren mitting 337
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=