A14095:735
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…
A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of D. Jacksons profound discourses, may see the vanity and weakness of them, in sundry passages, and especially so far as they tend to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twice, Doctor of Divinity, as they say, from whom the copy came to the pressA discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of D. Iacksons profound discourses, may see the vanitie and weaknesse of them, in sundry passages, and especially so farre as they tende to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twisse, Doctor of Divinitie, as they say, from whom the copie came to the presse
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1631
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.
Now as for the term of foreknowledge; I answer the knowledge of what may be, or is fit to be, goes before the will of God, and so may be called the foreknowledge of God; but the knowledge that things shall be, though it followeth Gods will, yet may it be called foreknowledge in respect of the event of the things themselves. For the things exist in time, but God did know, that they should be, from all eternity, like as from all eternity he did decree the futurition of them. Your second interrogatory is this, Or shall we say God did inevitably decree the obliquity of Jewish blasphemy against his Son because he did most certainly foreknow it? You ⟨p. 282⟩never showed your teeth till now, by this I perceive what you aim at, which hitherto you have been ashamed to profess in plain terms, namely, that future contingents which come to pass in the World are not decreed. But what mean you to deny that, in this cunning manner, which you durst not deny openly. For the syllogism you proposed to answer contained this, in plain terms in the Minor thus, All things that come to pass are decreed to come to pass: which if you had but in plain terms denied, your solution had been plain and brief, whereas you neglecting that course did fetch a great compass instead of answering to requite us with another argument whereby to infer a proposition contradictory to our conclusion.
Now as for the terme of foreknowledge; I answere the knowledge of what may be, or is fitt to be, goes before the will of God, and so may be called the foreknowledge of God; but the knowledge that things shall be, though it followeth Gods will, yet may it be called foreknowlege in respect of the event of the things themselves. For the things exist in time, but God did know, that they should be, from all eternitie, like as from all eternitie he did decree the futurition of them. Your second interrogatorie is this, Or shall we say God did inevitably decree the obliquitie of Iewishe blasphemy against his Sonne because he did most certainly foreknowe it? You ⟨p. 282⟩never shewed your teeth till now, by this I perceave what you aime at, which hitherto you have beene ashamed to professe in plaine termes, namely, that future contingents which come to passe in the World are not decreed. But what meane you to deny that, in this cunning manner, which you durst not deny openly. For the syllogisme you proposed to answere contained this, in plaine termes in the Minor thus, All things that come to passe are decreed to come to passe: which if you had but in plaine termes denyed, your solution had beene plaine and briefe, whereas you neglecting that course did fetche a great compasse insteed of answering to requite us with another argument whereby to inferre a proposition contradictory to our conclusion.