A14212:167
A collection of certain learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zechariah…A collection of certaine learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary…
A collection of certain learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary Ursine; doctor and professor of divinity in the noble and flourishing schools of Neustad. For explication of divers difficult points, laid down by that author in his catechism. Lately put in print in Latin by the last labour of D. David Parry: and now newly translated into English, by I.H. for the benefit and behoof of our Christian country-manA collection of certaine learned discourses, written by that famous man of memory Zachary Ursine; doctor and professor of divinitie in the noble and flourishing schools of Neustad. For explication of divers difficult points, laide downe by that author in his catechisme. Lately put in print in Latin by the last labour of D. David Parry: and now newlie translated into English, by I.H. for the benefit and behoofe of our Christian country-man
Oxford: printed by Joseph Barnes, 1600Oxford: printed by Ioseph Barnes, 1600
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.
Fifth, 1you tell us this is a doctrine of the law. What then? is it therefore false? is not the law as true as the Gospel? furthermore, you say it is drawn from reason it self. You had need be more eagle-sighted in Plato & Aristotle his books, then I and all men besides have bin, which could never find it there. But in a word, know that it is learned out of the hidden mysteries of the gospel. Do you think that Pauls intent was in the 9. 10. 11. and 12. to the Romans, and 1. to the Ephesians to preach the Law? I do not think you believe it. And what doth nearer concern the very m•rrow of the Gospel, then the eternal, free, and immutable love of God towards his elect, which Christ s•ith was the cause why he• gave his only begotten son for us, much more saved us everlastingly, being once engrafted into him through faith, and finished in us the work which he had begun? I know not what may concern the gospel if these things do not. It may suffice again to admonish you (as before) of maintaining the purity of our article of justification. But those words of yours, (O bow that exclamation troubled me, TO WHOM DOTH GOD OWE ANY THING•) filled […] partly with admiration, partly with indignation & grief. I was out of pat• ence when I read them. Surely either you have bin ⟨p. 119⟩little conversant in reading holy scriptures, or to much possessed with affection & prejudice, when you so saucily condemn the words of scripture. Is it not the exclamation of Paul, Rom. 11. 35. Who hath first given unto the Lord, that he may recompense him? Truly nothing more comforteth me, then this unspeakable love of God towards me, that owing no more to me then to Judas or Cain, yet for all that, of an enemy he hath made me a son, by the death of his only begotten. For that which you allege of Gods binding himself unto us by promise, is nothing at all to the purpose. What then (I pray) will you pretend, before the applying of this promise? To whom doth this promise bind God, but unto him that embraceth it by faith? But who embraceth or receiveth it besides those, on whom God vouchsafeth to bestow this benefit? he obligeth himself to as many as believe, and this very obligation proceedeth of his free goodness. But where (el me) where in scripture do you read, that God bindeth himself by any promise to give faith & repentance unto all?