A14095:932
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.
Secondly show what hath accrued to Gods decrees whereby after a certain space of time they are said to be finished, for want whereof they could not be said to be finished before.
Secondly shew what hath accrewed to Gods decrees whereby after a certeyne space of time they are sayd to be finished, for want whereof they could not be sayd to be finished before.
Thirdly it is manifest, this cannot hold, as touching the decree of creation. For as much as there was no space of time before the execution of that decree. And therefore if that decree were finished at all before the execution of it, it was finished from everlasting before it. And if that decree were finished before the World was made, then also all the decrees of God were finished before the World was made. For all Gods decrees are alike everlasting as your self (I think) will not deny. And here you propose not, this doctrine of any decree of God in special, but of his decrees in general, implying thereby that it is as true of one as of another, and consequently if it holds not in any one, it fails in all. If Gods decrees are finished from everlasting before the execution of them, this is flatly contradictory to your assertion: But if you ⟨p. 384⟩think to say that Gods decrees are not finished actu intern until they are executed actu externo; then they had not their full and entire existence till the execution of them; and consequently they are temporal, not eternal; and though man finisheth his decrees before he executes them, yet God doth not.
Thirdly it is manifest, this cannot holde, as touchinge the decree of creation. For as much as there was no space of time before the execution of that decree. And therfore if that decree were finished at all before the execution of it, it was finished from everlasting before it. And if that decree were finished before the World was made, then also all the decrees of God were finished before the World was made. For all Gods decrees are alike everlasting as your selfe (I thinke) will not denye. And here you propose not, this doctrine of any decree of God in speciall, but of his decrees in generall, implying thereby that it is as true of one as of another, and consequently if it holds not in any one, it fayles in all. If Gods decrees are finished from everlasting before the execution of them, this is flatly contradictory to your assertion: But if you