A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of…A discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of…

I nothing doubt, but the same end God can bring to pass by divers means, and that all these means are known to God but what you mean by mixing their several possibilities of miscarriage in what degree he list. I understand not. One kind of means is possible to miscarry, so is another, so is every one, for so you acknowledge them all to be in themselves not inevitable, but contingent; the meaning whereof I conceive to be this, they do not inevitably, but contingently accomplish the end proposed, this I take to be the meaning though incongruously delivered. But how can God be said to mix these possibilities, unless you mean hereby Gods comprehending of them all, which is a truth. For God comprehends them all in his mind, but without mixing of them. But you seem to project a farther meaning, by the last words as when you say in what degree, and proportion he list. I take the meaning obscurely delivered to be this; God knows every degree of their possibility to miscarriage, or rather God makes the possibility either of each his miscarriage, or of all their miscarriage in what degree he list; yet it seems you acknowledge no degree of possibility of the miscarriage of them all. For you maintain it as a thing necessary, that all shall not miscarry in the words immediately following. Have you not such a conceit as his? God hath ordained the apprehension of a Traitor, either by this means or by that means, or by a third means or by a fourth? if it be I would you had spoken out, and told us your mind plainly, yet we may take also that into our consideration in the end. But by the way I see no ⟨p. 263⟩grounds of these degrees of possibility which you fancy. For all of the means being as you confess contingent, and evitable as you speak, I see no reason, but every one should be equally possible to miscarry. If you had talked of degrees of probability of miscarriage, I should not have excepted against it, but I seem to have just reason to except against the degrees of possibility.

I nothing doubt, but the same ende God can bring to passe by divers meanes, and that all these meanes are knowne to God but what you meane by mixing theyr severall possibilities of miscariage in what degree he list. I understand not. One kind of meanes is possible to miscarry, so is another, so is every one, for so you acknowledge them all to be in themselves not inevitable, but contingent; the meaning wherof I conceave to be this, they doe not inevitably, but contingently accomplishe the end proposed, this I take to be the meaning though incongruously delivered. But how can God be sayd to mixe these possibilities, unlesse you meane hereby Gods comprehending of them all, which is a truth. For God comprehends them all in his mind, but without mixing of them. But you seeme to project a farther meaning, by the last wordes as when you say in what degree, and proportion he list. I take the meaning obscurely delivered to be this; God knowes every degree of theyr possibility to miscarriage, or rather God makes the possibility eyther of each his miscarriage, or of all theyr miscarriage in what degree he list; yet it seemes you acknowledge no degree of possibility of the miscarriage of them all. For you maynteyne it as a thing necessary, that all shall not miscarry in the wordes immediately following. Have you not such a conceite as his? God hath ordeyned the apprehension of a Traytor, eyther by this meanes or by that meanes, or by a third meanes or by a fourth? if it be I would you had spoken out, and told us your minde plainly, yet we may take also that into our consideration in the end. But by the way I see no