C. XV. The fallacious groundofthis ArgumentofMG's. 332 ment and impairing why maynot the Spirit in the ill, not immixits felfe and its luflings threwith, but beare off from the full influence ofthewill into themwhich otherwife it would have. But faith he,ifthefpirit cloth not ceafe!lifting before theflefh bring forth the aïloffinnef then is the Spirit conquered by the flefh, contrary to that of theApo,. file. [ 5ohn 4.4. Stronger is he that is inyou, than he that is in the world. But Firfl,iffrom hence theflefb mutt be thought& conceived tobeflronger than the Spirit, becaufe it prevailes inany aft unto fin, notwithftanding the con- tendingofthe Spirit, how much moremutt it bejudged toprevaile over it and to conquer it,if it caufe it utterly to ceaf, and notto ftrive atall? He that reftrainesan other that he flail not oppofe him at all, hath a greater power than he who conquers him in his réfiftance; But why dothMr Goodwin feare leaft the flefh fhould be afferted tobe ftronger in us than theSpirit ? Is not his whole defigne toprove that it is?or may be fo,fo much fronger and more prevalent than it, that whereas it is confeffed on all hands, that the Spirit dothnever wholly conquer the flefh that it fhall not remaine in the Saints in this life, yetthat-the flefh doth wholly prevaile over the Spirit and con- quer it to an utter expulfion ofit, out of the hearts of them in whom it is. Secondly, In the prevalencyofthe flefh, it is not theSpirit himfelfethat is conquered, but only fomemotions,& netings ofhim in thehearts Now though Come partienlar a bngs andmotionsof hismay not comeout eventually unto fucceffe,yet if hegenerally bearer Rule in the heart, he isnot to bePaid (even as in us and afting inus) not tobeffronger than theflefh. Heis, as in us, on this account, laid to begranger than he that is in the world, becaufe notwithftan- ding all the oppofition that is againft us, he preferveth us in our Rate and condition ofAcceptation with God, and walking with himwith an up- right heart, in good workes and dutyes for the molt part,though fome- times the flefhprevailes unto finne, fromwhich yet he recoversus byRepen- tance. 4 Thirdly, To fpeake a little to Mr Goodwin's fence; By the Spirits infufici- eney it is manifeft from the Text urged,and fromwhat followes in thefame place, that he intends not Spiritualsvitaprinciple in the will, having its re- fidence there, with its contrary principle the flefh, (perhapshe will grant no fuch thing) but the Spirit ofGod himfelfe. How now doth this Spirit luft ? Not formally doubtleffe, but bycaufingus fo todo; and how doth it do that . in Mr Goodwin's judgement? Meerelyby perfwading ofus fo to do;fo that to have theflefh prevaile againft the Spirit, is nothing in his fence, but to have finne prevaile, and the motives of the flefh above the motives ufed by the Spirit, which may be done, and yet theSpirit continue unqueftionably (iron- ger than the flefh: Fourthly, The fumme is, Ifthe Spirit and theflefi, Luft and Grace, may be lockt on as habituall qualityes and principlesin the wills ofthe fame perfons, fo that though aman bathbut onewill, vet by reafon oftherecontrary qua- lityes,He is tobe efteemed as twodiverfeprinciplesofoperation, it is evident that having contrary inclinations continually, the will bath in its a&ings a Relation to both thefe principles, fo that no finne is commited by fuch anone with his wholewill andfull content; That contrary qualityes in aKerniffc degree tnaybein the Came fubje&,is' knowne Lippis Tonforibus; Thefe adverfe principles the Fleflr'and Spirit, areasthofecontraryqualityes ofthefame fub- je&; and the inclinations, tea and the elicite a&s of thewill, areof the fame nature with them; fo that in the fame a& they mayboth be working though not with equal' efficacy. Notwithftanding any thing then Paid to the con- trary
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=