The fallacious Ground of this Argument of M. G's. C. XV Spirit againfl' theflefb; Bist when the flefhhaving prevailed in thecombate, bring= ethforthher defre intoail,theSpirit ceafeth from his auof Lulling; otherwife it would follow that thefiefh is greater andfironger in her tufting, than the Spirit ofGod inhis; and that when thefief/3 lnfleth after theperpetration ofEach orfuch aftnne, the Spirit as to the hindering 'ofit luileth but in vaine, which is contrary to that of the Apo1tle, greater ishe that is input (fpeaking as tis cleare ofthe Spirit ofGod unto true Believers) than he that is in the world,meaning Sathan and all his Auxiliaries Sinne,Flefh, Corruption. Anf. What we intendby theSaints not finning with their whole willshath been declared; thatthere is not a confiftency in the explanation we havegi- ven,Mr Goodwinafferts; becaufe it would inferre apluralityyea a contrariety ofwills in thefamepert'on at thefame time. That there isa plurality,yea A con- trariety of wills in theScripture fenceof the expreffion of thewill ofa mari . was beforefrom the Scripture declared; not aplurality ofwills in a Phyfscall fence, as the will is anatural/faculty ofthe foule, but in a Moral! andAnalo- gicall fepce,as'tis taken for a habit or principle ofgood or evil /. Thewill is a natural/ faculty; one nature bath one will; in every Regenerate man there are two natures,the newor divine,and theoldor eorrupted. In the fame fence thereare in him twowills,as was declared. But faith he, It is an impofbility ofthefrrft evidence that thereflwuldbe a plurality ofAils in the famefubjeú,at thefame time,and theft contrary one to another. But 1. Ifyou intend acts in a Morali Confideration, unlefhe you adde about the fame Obje&, which you do not, this Aflertion is fo farce from any eviz dence of truth,that it is ridiculoufly falfe; May not thefame perfon love Cod and hate the Divell at the fame time? But 2. Howpafie you fo fuddenly from aplurality ofwills,to aplurality ofaets? by thewill we intend(in the fence whereinwe fpeak ofit)an habit-snot anyail; i.e.Thewill ashabitually invefted with a new principle,& nit as aí`tually will; ing from thenceo& by vertue thereof; Arminius from whom our Author bor- rowes thisDifcourfe fell not into thisSophiftry,he tels you There cannot be con- trary wills or volitions about thefatneAfd;But is it withM.G. or Arsniniuean im- pofiibility that there fhoúld be amixtaElion partly Voluntary, &partly invo- luntary?a&ions wholeprinciples are from'without byperfwafìon may be fo,a mans throwing his goods in the Sea to fave his owne life; Now theprinciples whereofwe fpeak,Flefb &Grace, are internal/ &contrary,& {hall not thea&i- ensthat proceed from a faculty wherein each contrary principles have their reiidence, be partly voluntary,partly involuntary ? 3. But he tells you That though there might be Billing ofthe Spirit a- gainfl thefef) before theall o ffnne, yet When it comes to the ailing ofit then it ceafeth,& fo the áa iswrought with the Wholewill: Firtt though this were fo, yetthis doth not prove but that the A&ion is mixt,andnot abfolutely and wholly voluntary. Mixt A&ions are foefteemed from the antecedent deliberation and diffent, though the will be at length prevailedupon thereunto, and.I have {hewed before thatin the very a&ion there is a vernal' diffent, becaufe of theoppofite principle thatis in the will. But Secondly, How'doth it appeare that the Spirit cloth not lull again fi thefief, (though not toa prevalency)even in the exertion ofthe a&s offinne?{n every good a& thatamad doth, becaufe evili is prefent with him, though the pre- valencybe ofthe partofthe Spirits And the principleofGrace, yet the flefh alfowith its linings doth alwayes inpart corrupt its Thence areall the fpots, Raines, and imperfe&ionsofthe holy things, and dutyesofthe Saints; and if theflefhhits lulling will immix it felfe withour good A&ions to their defile - bIu a ment 331
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=