lohn3.9. Argued. be the caufe 7;4 ¿v oams (he cannotfinne.) When the abidingofthe feed, ring. ly confidered is not ufed as any reafonat allofthe firft, nor in the propofition as it lyeth, thefeed abideth anyotherwife, but as it is thecaufe of the latter, (hecannot f,nne). 3. Even the exprefiion [he corn mitteth not finne,] denoteth not only the prefent a&uall frame, and walking, ofhim of whom it is fpoken,but his eftate andcondition: being onceborneof God he committeth not finne; no one that is foborne ofGod doth5 none in the ftate & condition ofa Regene- rate Perfon Both fo; that is inhis courfe and walking to the ends and this is argued not fo much diftinttly to thepermanencieof the feed, as from thefeed withfuch an Adiunét. 4. Mr Goodwin's Allufions, to the , foule, and the Obedience of Angels, are oflittleufe, f or none at all to the illuftration of the buneffe inhand. For though the why the foule moveth the body to day, isnot becaufe it will move it tomorrow, yet the reafon why thebody moveth, and cannot but do fo, is becaufe it bath the Soule abiding in it, andhe that than fay, he that liveth moveth, for he hath afoale,abiding in him, andcannot but move, Chaff fpeake properly enough. And the reafon why theAngelis do the will ofGod in Heaven, that is, alluallycontinue in fo doing is, becaufe they have fuch a confirmed &uncontroulable principleof Obedience: So that all thefe Excel). tions amount not to the leaft weakning of theApoftles Arguments. Sea. 32. Our Authour giveth two inftances toprove that theword [u:ve.] in the Scripture,fignifieth fometime only to be,& not to abide, and theyare the one, John 14. And theother a John 3.14. And one Argument, to manifeft that in the placeunder Confideration, it muftneeds fìgnify aprefent abodeand being,andnot a continuance &c. Anf. I. Ifany fuch places befound,yet it is confeffed that it is an unufuall fence ofthe word, anda thoufandplacesofthat kind, will not inforceit to be fo taken in another place, unleffe the circumftancesofit,and matter wherea. bout it treateth,enforce that fence, and will not beare that which ispro.. r 2. M. G. doth not make it good by the inftances he produceth that the word is tyed up in any place, to denote precifely only the being ofa thing, without relation to its abidingand continuance Of theone john 14. r7. But yeknowhim becaufe he remaineth with you,4:° fhall be inynu.(faith he)the latter claufe [fhall be in you] will befound a meereTautologie, ifthe other phrafe [abideth with you]importetha perpetuall residence or inbeing. But that thisphrafe[abideth withyon] importeth the fame with thephrafe in theforegoing verfe, whereit is clearely expounded by the addition ofthe terme forever (that he may abide withyouforever) I fuppofe cannot bequefli' oned, Nor 2. Is there any the leaft appearance ofa ttáutology inthe words. His re' mainingwith Believers, being the thing promifed,andhis inbeing, the manner ofhisabode with them. Alfo the t lohn 14. e+N ¿ ir,S as ars', doth not limply denotean Pateor Condition, but an eftate or conditionin itsnature, with- out the interpofitionofAlmightyGrace, abiding, and permanent: fo that nei- ther have we yet any inftance ofreftraining the fignificancyof the word, as pretended, produced: nor ifanyplace could be fo, would it in the leaft in- force that Acceptation ofthe word in this placecontended about. Wherefore M. Goodwin (as I faid) adder, an Argument , to evince that the word muff necelfarily be taken in thefence by him inCítedon in this place , which is in- deed a courfe to thepurpofe, ifhisArgument provefo in any tneafnre; It is this. Becaufefach afignification ofit,Would render the fence altogether inconfi- fl'ent
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=