A treatise of original sin ... proving that it is

So that it should seem by this, That the Annotator would think Arminius, and those who think this Discourse to be understood of a man in a preparatory way to conversion, and as it were not far from the kingdom of God, to yield too much: We must rather look upon it as spoken in the person of some enormous and transcendent sinner: but I think herein he is primus and solus. Besides his assertion is against Aristotle, who writing of the incontinent person, that in some respects knoweth the actions to be sins, yet doth them, saith notwithstanding, that he is not a wicked man, but [Greek or Hebrew], a semi-wicked man, Ethic. lib. 7. cap. 9. [Greek or Hebrew]. But concerning this sinning against knowledge in a regenerate person, as also the collation of him with an incontinent person more hereafter. Only by the way we may wonder, why ⟨p. 486⟩the above mentioned Annotator in his Annotations on this place, is so industrious to prove this passage cannot be meant of a regenerate person, from verse the eighth and the ninth in this Chapter, where it's said, Sin wrought all manner of concupiscence in him, that sin revived and he died. For surely he cannot but know, That none of the Dissenters from him in this Exposition, do apply those verses to a regenerate man; but that the application to such a person beginneth at the fourteenth verse, or else as Calvin, at the fifteenth verse; But it is not so material to know what men say, as what may be evinced out of the Chapter it self. Only we may add, That the Socinian is likewise very stiff and zealous in the Interpretation of this Chapter concerning a non-regenerate person. Yea the Polonian Knight, that writeth the life of Socinus, would have us take notice of a wonderful work of God, convincing an eminent man of this Exposition; for thus he relateth, Pag. 21. That anno 1585. in the Synod of Lublin, the opinion of Socinus concerning the seventh of the Romans, was exceedingly agitated; and that one Nicolaus Zitinius, being one of those Pastors, who opposed the Socinian Exposition, was desired to explain that Chapter contrary to the mind of Socinus; which he stoutly managed, till he came to those words, I thank God through Jesus Christ, and then standing like a man amazed; What is that benefit (saith he) which drew from the Apostle so great thanks?

So that it should seem by this, That the Annotatour would think Arminius, and those who think this Discourse to be understood of a man in a preparatory way to conversion, and as it were not farre from the kingdom of God, to yeeld too much: We must rather look upon it as spoken in the person of some enormious and transcendent sinner: but I think herein he is primus and solus. Besides his assertion is against Aristotle, who writing of the incontinent person, that in some respects knoweth the actions to be sinnes, yet doth them, saith notwithstanding, that he is not a wicked man, but , a semi-wicked man, Ethic. lib. 7. cap. 9. . But concerning this sinning against knowledge in a regenerate person, as also the collation of him with an incontinent person more hereafter. Only by the way we may wonder, why