A26883:2380
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
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.
2. And your fiction of signa rationis, and the necessary antecedence of a decree of Gods, to his knowledge of every Volition of man, is a more ungrounded and perilous figment, which you have not proved. It seemeth a denial of Gods Omniscience or perfection, that he cannot know an act future as future, but only as decreed to be so.
2. And your fiction of signa rationis, and the necessary antecedence of a decree of Gods, to his knowledge of every Volition of man, is a more ungrounded and perillous figment, which you have not proved. It seemeth a denyal of Gods Omniscience or perfection, that he cannot know an act future as future, but only as decreed to be so.
3. You deceitfully talk of permitting evil while you plead for the irresistible predetermining premotion of the will by God to every evil act with all its circumstances: Is that but Permitting?
4. To permit is Nothing: no act of God; but a non-agency: not to hinder. And how prove you, that God must of necessity have a Positive Decree, for every Nothing or non-agency? Is not the not-willing or not decreeing to hinder a lye, e. g. (supposing natural concurse,) or to make more worlds, enough to the production of that lye by an ill inclined nature? or to the not-being of more Worlds? We are in the dark, and God is infinitely above us, and these tremendous mysteries are not to be so presumptuously handled by unproved assertions.
4. To permit is Nothing: no act of God; but a non-agency: not to hinder. And how prove you, that God must of necessity have a Positive Decree, for every Nothing or non-agency? Is not the not-willing or notdecreeing to hinder a lye, e. g. (supposing natural concurse,) or to make more worlds, enough to the production of that lye by an ill inclined nature? or to the not-being of more Worlds? We are in the dark, and God is infinitely above us, and these tremendous mysteries are not to be so presumptuously handled by unproved assertions.