Ocher Objefkions to the Argument in hand,Removed. CA P. 11L : ;5; r.. That thecafehere propofed, and pretended tobeparallel/to that un- 75 derour Confideration,isafiClitiom thing, a fanned Concatenation of famed . Decrees ofGod, being neither in any one place delivered in the Scripture, nor to be colle&ed from any, orall the Texts in the Bible: which courfeof proceeding, ifit maybe Argumentative in facred Truths, it will be an eafie and facile taske to overthrowthe molt Eminent and cfearely delivered Heads ofDo&rive in the whole $coke ofGod. 2. That it is a cafe furrnifed by him fuitable to his owne Hypothe- fes, neither true in itsfelfe, nor any way Analogous to that wherewith 'tis yoked, being indeed a new way and tone ofbegging the thing in queftion. For infrance; It fuppofeth (without the leaftAttempt ofproofe) (s.)Conditi- onall Decrees,ora disjun&ive intendment of Events inGod; it !hall come to paffe, or otherwife. (2.) A middlefcienceconditionall,as the foundation of thofe disjun&ive Decrees; with (3.) A futurition of things, Antecedent to any determiningA& ofthe Will ofGod; and (q..) Apofíibilityoffruftrating (as to Event) the Defignes and purpofesof God; and (5.) That all medium s ofthe Accoplifhmentofany thing , are conditions ofGods intentions, as to the end he aymes at; & (6.),That God appoints aferies of mediumsfor the compaf îngofan End, and defignes them thereunto, without anydetermi- nateRefolution tobring about that End;& (7.)That theA&s ofGods Grace in their Concatenation mentioned in this place of Rom. 8. are feverally Conditionall, becaufe he bath invented or faigned force Decrees ofGod which he fayes are fo; All which, with the inferences from them, Mr Goodwin knowes will not advance his Reafonings at all, as to our Underftandings,be- ing fully perfwaded, that theyare all Abominations ofno leffe bate alloy, then the Errour it felfe, in whole defence and Patronage they are produ- ced. . To ourArgument then before mentioned, prooving an equall indiffólvea blenefe in all the linkes oftheChaine of Divine Graces,drawne forth and infiftedon, from the equal! dependanceofthe defigne &PurpofeofGod on the mutual! dependance of each of them on the other , for the fullfilingof that Purpofe of his, and obtaining the End, which he profef(es himfelfe to intend: this is the fummeofMr Goodwin Anfwer, If ICan invent aferies of Decrees, anda ConcatenationofDivine Alls, though indeed there be no filch thing, neither can Igive any colour to it without laying downe, and takingfor grantedmanyfalfe and abfurd fuppofalls; and though it be not o fthefame nature with that here propofedby theApofile,nor any where held out in the Scripture for any fuch End & Purpofe as this is; neither can I affigne any abfolute de- terminateend in this Seriesofmine,whofe Accomplfhment God ingages him- felfeto bring about; (as the Cafe (lands in the place ofScripture under Con= federation) then it is meet and equitable, that laying afide all inforcements from theText, Context, Nature ofGod, the thing treated on, all compelling us todole with another fenceand Interpretation, that we regulate the minde of the Holy Ghoft herein, to the Rule,proportion, and Analogieofthe cafe as formerly propofed. This beingthe fumme ofthat, whichMr Goodwin Calls his Anfwer, made naked I prefume to its lhame, valeat quantum valere pateV.. I!hall onlyadde that (i.) when Mr Goodwin !hall make good thatorder and seriesofDecrees, here by him mentioned,from the scripture,orwith folid Reafon from the nature ofthe things themfelves, fuitably to the Properties of him, whofe they are; And (2.) Proove that anyeternall Decree ofGod either as to its primitive ena&ing, or temporall Execution, is fufpended on any thing, not only really contingent in it (elfe and its ówne nature, in re- L 2 fpe& ß35s
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=