A14095:941
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 though all his works he brings forth according to the counsel of his will, yet both this counsel and this will of his is eternal. Here you propose a question, shall we say then, he hath not decreed whatsoever doth or shall befall us? And you answer it affirmatively in a certain sense which is this, He doth not now first begin to decree them. Now I appeal to every judicious Reader to determine, whether this interpretation of yours be not plainly contradictious to the manifest meaning of that assertion which you interpret. For if God doth not new begin to decree those things that befall us, doth it not manifestly follow here hence that he hath already decreed them, rather then that he hath not decreed them already? We willingly grant that Gods decrees have no end but continue the same still, but you would have us think that they are still in making.
And though all his workes he brings forth according to the counsayle of his will, yet both this counsayle and this will of his is eternall. Here you propose a question, shall we say then, he hath not decreed whatsoever doth or shall befall us? And you answere it affirmatively in a certaine sense which is this, He doth not now first beginne to decree them. Now I appeale to every judicious Reader to determine, whether this interpretation of yours be not plainly contradictious to the manifest meaninge of that assertion which you interprete. For if God doth not new beginne to decree those things that befall us, doth it not manifestly follow here hence that he hath already decreed them, rather then that he hath not decreed them already? We willingly grant that Gods decrees have no end but continue the same still, but you would have us thinke that they are still in making.
As God himself was from everlasting and still continueth unto everlasting, in like sort Gods decree or will was from everlasting, and the same will of his continueth still without any alteration or shadow of change. But albeit Gods will continueth the same without change and end, yet I find no example to justify this phrase of yours, in saying God now decreeth the things that befall us; and you may as well say that God shall decree the things that do befall us; and that by the same reason; for his decree hath no end. And is it a sober speech think you to affirm, that God doth now decree the creation of the World, or the fall of Angels, or the turning of Adam out of Paradise, or Noah's flood, or the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah with fire and brimstone? You say it is much safer to think on Gods decree as present to the whole course of our life, then as it was before the World: for so we shall think of them as of acts past and finished, more irrevocable then the laws of the Medes and Persians. Well then you deny not that these decrees were before the World, if this be as much as to be