Schlater - BS2725 S35 1627

24. C a A P. i. An Expofition vpon thefzrfl V E R,4 fures,and the like holy meanes of refloring them that are fallen; If hyinrniitieany had beene ouertaken; fuck they Should ref}ore in the spirit of M :ekenetl'e and Mer- cie. Thole that more wilfully had withdrawne there. felues, and bewraied more obf#.inacie, Should tafle more rigour. Is not the conclufion roundly inferred ? there- fore the regenerate may infallibly know the regenerate. The difference Saint Ink (peaks of,is in the quality and degree of offences; not of elef}ion or reprobation of the perlons. O6ieFf. Fift realm; others in former times knew infallibly the regeneration and ele£tion of others; as Paul prefef -I lèth of Timothy, Epaphras, Hebrewes;, therefore may wee. How haudfomely might this man by this Argument prou e hirnfèlfe fume rnirabilarius Wonder.workei Prepher,,or Apof}le? There haue bin that haue wrought,34 Wonders, zflopt mouths ofLyons, quencht violence of fire, foretold things to come; and why not this man and his Difciples ? But ro "thepoint; when you will realen from place of equals,you muff make your termes egtrall. What Pau/knew, not eueiy one can know; except free haue Pails gifts, meanes, in Paulsmealure. For Timothy ,there a r Tim.t,a8. event `7- ropbefies a6eforeofbim; P A y L had his rent larion. For Hebrewes,heprofe fèth noinfallible knowledge ,but bAeb.6.9. a eharitablcbperfrrafien: and the like is to bee thought of Epapbrar änd O*acfnauu. And dare you challenge like meafure of difcerning with Apoflles? drgument 6. Thole whom we mull lone feruenrly, wee may know °;rtainly; you meane to be elected and regenerate. But e z Pet. I. 22. ., the Regenerare wee mull c lame fervently; therefore wee may know them to be filch infallibly. elr,fw. The profofition is falfe, there being,no neceflitieof infallible knowledge to the procurement offeruent loue. Dauid, I crow, loued him well,thac he made & familiar, dPfl51.e3,t4, dtowkombe imparted his Comfits; neither will J doubt, but