Owen - Houston-Packer Collection BX9315 .O8 1721

24 14 DISPLAY of confifieth her a conformity unto his precepts, and not unto his purpofes : on this ground, (a) Gregory affirmeth, that many fulfil the mild of God, that is his intentions when they think to change it, by traufgreffing his precepts, and by refilling, imprudently obeyGod's purpofe ; and toPhew how merelywe inour anionsare tied to this ruleof our duty, (b) St. Afin thews how a man may do good in a thing crofs to God's fe- cret will, and evil in that which complieth with it ; which he illuftrates by the example of a fick parent having two children, the one wicked, who defines his fa- ther's death, the other godly, and prays for his life : but thewill of God is he (hall die, agreeably to the defire of the wicked child, and yet it is the other, who hath perfumed his duty, and done what is pleafing unto God. 3.) To return from this not unneceffary digreffion, that which we have now in agita- tion, is the fecret will of God which we have before unfolded, and this it is that we charge the Arminian for affirming, that it may be refilled; that is, that God may fail in his purpofes, come fhort of what he earnefily intendeth, or be fruftrated of his aim and end, as if he fhould determinatelyrefolve the faithand falvation of any man, it is ill the power of that man to make void his determination, and not be- lieve, and not be faved. Now it is only in cafes of this nature, wherein our own freewills have an intereft, that they thus limit and circumfcribe the power of the moil high : in other things, they grant his omnipotence to be of no lets extent than others do ; bat in this cafe, they are peremptory and refolute, without any colouring or tergiverfation ; for whereas there is a quefiion propofed by the apoftle, Rom. ix. 19. Who hath refilled his will? which that none hath or can, he grants in the following verfes ; (c) Cormines affirms it is only an objeElion of the Yews rejefted by the apofile, which is much like an anfwer young fcholars ufually give to fume dif- ficult place in Ariffotle, when they cannot think of a better, Lequitur ex aliorum fen- testia ; for firft there is no fign of any filch rejeftion of it by the whole following difcourfe. Yea, and it is not the Yews, that St. Paul difputeth withal here, but weaker brethren concerning the Yews; which is manifefi from the firft verfe of the next chapter, where he dififnguifheth between brethren to whom, and ¡free! of whom he fpake. Secondly, He fpeaks of the jems in the whole treatife in the third perfoc, but of the difputer in the fecond. Thirdly, It is taken for a confeffed prin- ciple, between St. Paul and the difputer, as he calls him ; that the yews ware re- jetted, which furely themfelves would not readily acknowledge. So that Garvin; reje£bs as an obje£tion of the 'ferns, a granted principle of St. Paul, and the other (á) chriftians of his time. With the like confidence the fame author affirmeth, That they nothing doubt but that many things are not done, which. God would have to be done. (e) Yellin" goesfurther,teaching, that not only many things are not done,whdth he would have done, but alfo that many things are done, which he mould not have desea He memo not our tranfgreffng of his law, but God's failing in his purpofe; as Corvinus clears it, acknowledging, that the execution of God's will is fufpended or hindered by roan; to whom (f) Epifcopius fubfcribes: as for example, God purpofethand intend- eth the converfion of a limier ; fuppofe it were Mary Magdalen, can this intention of his be [rolled, and his will refifted? Yea, fay the Armenians, for God converts fin- nere by his grace ; but we can refill God rotten he mould convert us by his grace, fay (g) fix of them jointly an their meeting at the Hague. Sue fume one may here objet, fay they, that thus God faileth of hisintention, dotlr not attain the end, at which he aims; we anfwer, this we grant ; or be it the falvationof men, they fray, they are certain (h) that God intendeth that for many, which never obtain it ; that end he cannot compafs. And here methinks they place God ins molt unhappy condition, by affirming that they are often: 'damned whom he would have to be faved, tho' he defsres their falvation with a moil (i) vehement delire and natural affeltion, fifth to) Multi voluntatemDei faciunt, cumillam nitentur citare, K refiftendo imprudently obfequun- tur divino confine, Greg. Moral. lib. 6. cap m. (b) Aug f. Enchirid. ad Lauren, rap. ton. ( ) Ea fententia non mntinet Apoftoli verba, fed Judxorum objefiionem ab Ap oftolo rejeffam, Corwin' ad Mil. cap. 3. per. 1q. (d) Malta non fieri quaDeus fieri volt, vel non dubitamus, Garvin. ibid. cap. 5.9.65. (e) Multa fiant (tux Deus fieri non volt: tree femper fivatqua ipfe fieri vals, Poll.de Deo. 5. 6a. (f) Ab bomine ebb agnofciaus, quod voluntatis (divine) executio tope fufpendatur..Corvtn. f i rot. 12. Epißop. Driver.prim de velum Dei coral. 5. (g) Polfumus Deo refftere, cam nos raft per tiam foam converrere, Rem. coll. Hag. p. 193. Objiciet uis, ergo ilium Teem finem Deus no <eft eScualus,. Refpondemus, nos hoc concedere, Rem. defwf. Jn#. in Synod. fol. 256. (5) tan eft, Deum multorum falutem intendere, in quibus earn non alfequitlrr, Grev;,. ad Arne!. fol. sin (i) Vehemeus eft Pea affelus adholni4 beuefeciendum, Car. ruiWis, sap 5.141! 5. i think,

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=