A00665:1276
A commentary or, exposition upon the divine second epistle general, writtenA commentary or, exposition vpon the diuine second epistle generall, written
A commentary or, exposition upon the divine second epistle general, written by the blessed apostle St. Peter. By Thomas AdamsA commentary or, exposition vpon the diuine second epistle generall, written by the blessed apostle St. Peter. By Thomas Adams
London: printed by Richard Badger and Felix Kyngston for Jacob Bloome, 1633London: printed by Richard Badger and Felix Kyngston for Iacob Bloome, 1633
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
8 Lastly, this is an argument of the finger of God, and supernatural power in holy Writ; that the Penners of it renounced all affection, and delivered the true message even against their own reputations. So did this Holy Spirit over-rule their pens, that they depress and disgrace themselves, and remain exposed as wonderments to all succeeding ages; that all glory may be the LORDS. If they did amiss, their errors are recorded either by themselves or their friends. The faults of Noah and Lot, are not concealed by him, that honoured the memory of Noah and Lot. Luke loved Paul and Barnabas, yet writing their Acts, he speaks of an unbecoming strife between them; which grew so sharp and hot, that they parted, Act. 15.39. Moses in his five Books, as he spared not his brother, nor his sister, nor his wife; neither Aaron, Miriam, nor Zippora; when they came in his way: so he least of all spared himself. That God had almost slain him for neglect of Circumcision; that when the people murmured, he was one: that he was only permitted to see, not to enter into Canaan: all this he writes of himself. Jeremiah records his own impatience, Jer. 15. David is own blood-guiltiness: Jonah his own uncharitableness, frowardness, and repining at Gods mercy. He was the writer, that was the offender; yet he reports the fault as if it had been of a stranger. He sets aside affection to his own credit, runs not into a bush with Adam: but writes his fault on his brow, points the finger at the transgressor under his own proper and individual name. He tells such a tale of himself, that if all his enemies had studied to lash him, they could not have matched it. Men are naturally ambitious, desirous either to blaze their own virtues, or to blanch their own errors. Look upon humane pens, how they are dipped in the oil of ostentation! They profess to chronicle the truth; but this friend, or that faction shall have a partial favour. They will not detect the evil that is, but insert the good that is not. But that one should in sobriety write a Treatise, to declare his own faults; this is not found in any Heathen. Tully will not have it buried, that Rome was beholding to him in the cause of Catiline. Plutarch, Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, may write much in their own praise: I never read in them one line of their wickedness.
8 Lastly, this is an argument of the finger of God, and supernaturall power in holy Writ; that the Penners of it renounced all affection, and delivered the true message even against their owne reputations. So did this Holy Spirit over-rule their pens, that they depresse and disgrace themselves, and remaine exposed as wonderments to all succeeding ages; that all glory may be the LORDS. If they did amisse, their errours are recorded either by themselves or their friends. The faults of Noah and Lot, are not concealed by him, that honoured the memory of Noah and Lot. Luke loved Paul and Barnabas, yet writing their Acts, he speakes of an unbecomming strife betweene them; which grew so sharpe and hot, that they parted,