A26883:1131
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,
London: printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons, 1675
THE Second Part. OF GODS GOVERNMENT, AND MORAL WORKS. › A PREMONITION.
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.
6. It is certain that Adam's eating the forbidden Fruit, or any one such sin as consisteth not with the predominancy of his Love to God as God, in habit, such as is now inconsistent with true Grace, and is called mortal, was to be punished with death temporal and eternal, according to the Justice of that Law.
7. They are different questions, 1. What God might do. 2. What he would do, (as decreed). 3. What he must do, (as necessary because of Justice or Veracity), to the breaker of that Law. And it is clear that God might, as an Act of Justice, punish the least culpable thought, or remissness of degree of Love, with Annihilation, or with any pain-everlasting, which to the Sinner were no worse than Annihilation. Because, 1. Antecedently to his Law, he might have done that much as an affliction without sin. 2. And after he did no way (that I know of) oblige himself to the contrary to a Sinner, before the Covenant of Grace. 3. And having threatened punishment in general, he might choose what punishment he saw fit.
7. They are different questions, 1. What God might do. 2. What he would do, (as decreed). 3. What he must do, (as necessary because of Justice or Veracity), to the breaker of that Law. And it is clear that God might, as an Act of Justice, punish the least culpable thought, or remissness of degree of Love, with Annihilation, or with any pain-everlasting, which to the Sinner were no worse than Annihilation. Because, 1. Antecedently to his Law, he might have done that much as an affliction without sin. 2. And after he did no way (that I know of) oblige himself to the contrary to a Sinner, before the Covenant of Grace. 3. And having threatned punishment in general, he might choose what punishment he saw fit.
8. What God would do as decreed, the prediction or the event only can tell us.