The Text perverted byM. G'$Expofition. CA rill. 4:29. A&s ofGods Grace, whereby his Purpofes, and Decrees are accomplifhed, 69 doe confift in theeffe&uall removeall of the Interveniences pretended, that fo theend aimedat in the Unchangeable Counfell ofGod, may (fuitably to the determination ofhis Soveragin,Omnipotent, Infinite, Wife Will)be accorn- plííhed. Neither doth it in the leaft appeare, that any fuch calling by the Word andSpirit , as may leave the Perlons fo called in their unbelief; (they being fo called in the purfuit ofthis Purpofe ofGod, togive them Faith, and make them conformable to Chrift) may be allowed place, or Roome in the Havenofthis Text:The likemay be faidofjujtifi'cation,where- in mendoe not Perfevere. Yea thefe two fuppofalls are only notanopen beg- ing ofthe thing inConteft,but a flat defyingofthe Apoftle as to the validity ofhis Demonftration, That all things (hall worke together 8tc. Notwithftanding then any thing that hath been obje&ed to the contrary, theFoundation ofGod mentioned in this placeofscripture flandsfirme, and his Eternall Purpofe of fafegarding the saints in the Love ofChriff , untill he bring them to the injoyment of himfelfe in Glory, Rands cleare from the leaftfbaddow ofchange, or fufpenfionupon any certaine Conditionalls, which areconfidently (but not fo much as fpecioufly) obtruded upon it. Thenext thing undertakenby Mr Goodwin, is tovindicate the forementio- 4.29. ned Glo(fesfrom fuch oppofitions, as arife againft them from the Context, andwords themfelves, with the de gne of the Holy Ghoft therein: Thefe things dothHe find his Expofition obnoxious unto. Theexpofition whichHe pretends togive no ftrength unto,but what is forraigne on all Confiderations whatfoever of words and things, to the place it (elfe: This , it feemes, is to prophefy accordingto the AnalogieofFaith. xom.I2. . Ftrft then Seei.44:To the ObjeEtion,thatthofe who are Calledare all() Ju_ flified,and (hall be Glorified,according to the Tenor of the (irks of theA&s of theGraceofGodhere layd down,he Anfwereth, That whereeither the one, or the other ofthefe Affertions, befo or no, it muff be judgedofby other Scriptures; Certain it is by what bath bin argued concerning thefrequent tefage ofthe Scripture in point ofE.x'preffion,that it cannot beconcludedor determinedby theScriptiure in hand.The Sumofthis Anfweramounts to thus much: Although the fenceop- pofed be cleare inthe Letter, and Expreffìon of this place ofScripture, in the Grammaticall fence, and ufe ofthe words;though it flowes from the whole Context,and Anfwers (alone) the defigne,and fcopeofthe place, which gives not the leaft Countenance to the interpofing of any fuch Conditionalls,asare framed, to force itto fpeake contrary to what &IAA T ' sgax ) it holdsforth: yet the mindofGod in the words, is not from thefe things to beconcluded on; but other fignifications and fences, not of anyword hereufed, not from thelaying downe ofthe fame Doetrine in other places with the Analogie of the Faith thereof, not from the propofing ofany defigne füitable to this here exprefl'ed, but places of Scripture agreeing with this, neither in Name, nor Thing,Expre(íion, nor Defigne, Word, norMatter, muff be found out in the fenceand meaningofthis place, and befrom themconcluded, and our inter- pretationofthis place accordingly regulated.Nobisnon beet 6c. neither hath M.Goodwin then produced any place ofSeripture,norcan he parallelto this fo much,as inexprefiìq,though treatingofanyother fubieet or matter,tharwill endure to have any fuch fence tyed to it, as that which he violently impofeth on this place ofthe Apofile. And of the Senfe,and Mind ofGod in this place, maynot fafelybe received and clofed withall , from the proper and ordinary fignificationoftheword ( which is always attended unto without the leaft difpute,-unleffe the fubje&matter ofany place, with the Context enforces to thefenfe left ufuall and naturali) with the 'elearedefigne and fcope ofthe K 3 Context
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=