A14095:828
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.
And you show either a great deal of ignorance in not understanding aright your adversaries tenets which you impugn, or that which is a great deal worse in dissembling and corrupting it. But I bear with you, it may be you fashion it in such a kind as may best give way to some conceits of yours, and very few arguments. Yet by your leave the more infallible any knowledge is, either of God, Angel or man, the more fit it shall be to found a necessity of consequence thereupon thus; It is infallibly foreknown, ergo it is necessary that it should be. Here followeth another extravagant of yours, for instead of opposing that opinion which maintains the ground of Gods foreknowledge of future contingents to be the determination of his will, you leave that and oppose the derivation of Gods infallibility from the absolute necessity of the event. An opinion that I never knew any man patronize; but it seems you would draw their opinion unto this, who maintain that God foreknows all things by seeing the determination of his own will concerning the futurition of them. Now, I pray you, of those that take this course who ever said that the events decreed by God were of absolute necessity? Yourself I have observed to profess, that upon Gods decree touching the futurition of a contingent thing, as namely, the apprehension of a Traitor, the success of the means tending thereunto is absolutely necessary as in this very chapter in the end of the first Section. But never was I acquainted with any of our divines that said so much. We profess that the producing of contingents is absolutely contingent, only this contingent production they hold to be necessary upon supposition of the will of God. And Durand wondereth that any should conceive things to fall out necessarily in respect of the will of God, whereas on the contrary he conceives it to be a clear thing, that not only contingent things but even necessary th•nges also (as we call them) do come to pass, all contingently in respect of the will of God.
And you shewe either a great deale of ignorance in not understanding aright your adversaries tenets which you impugne, or that which is a great deale worse in dissembling and corrupting it. But I beare with you, it may be you fashion it in such a kinde as may best give way to some conceytes of yours, and very fewe arguments. Yet by your leave the more infallible any knowledge is, either of God, Angell or man, the more fitt it shall be to found a necessitie of consequence thereupon thus; It is infallibly foreknowne, ergo it is necessary that it should be. Here followeth another extravagant of yours, for insteede of opposing that opinion which maintaynes the ground of Gods foreknowledge of future contingents to be the determination of his will, you leave that and oppose the derivaiton of Gods infallibilitie from the absolute necessitie of the event. An opinion that I never knewe any man patronize; but it seemes you would draw their opinion unto this, who maintayne that God foreknowes all things by seeing the determination of his owne will concerning the futurition of them. Now, I pray you, of those that take this course who ever sayd that the events decreed by God were of absolute necessitie? Yourselfe I have observed to professe, that upon Gods decree touching the futurition of a contingent thing, as namely, the apprehensiō of a Traytour, the successe of the meanes tending thereunto is absolutely necessary as in this very chapter in the end of the first Section. But never was I acquainted with any of our divines that sayd so much. We professe that the producing of contingents is absolutely contingent, only this contingent production they holde to be necessary upon supposition of the will of God. And Durand wondereth that any should conceive things to fall out necessarily in respect of the will of God, whereas on the contrary he conceaves it to be a cleare thing, that not only contingent thinges but even necessary thnges also (as we call them) doe come to passe, all contingently in respect of the will of God.