Doct. There is no lust in the world, can challenge or claim God for the Author or Fountain of it.

Doct. There is no lust in the world, can challenge or claime God for the Author or Fountaine of it.

He doth not mean the Creatures of the world, but the Lusts of the world; Take it in particular, David when he had committed Adultery, which was a lust of the flesh, 2 Sam. 11.3. this was evil in the sight of the Lord, therefore it was not pleasing to him, he pleased himself, but not God in this; in other ⟨p. 119⟩things he was a man after Gods own heart, in this after his own heart. So what made Joseph abstain from the like sin, but because he considered it would be a great sin against God? so for Covetousness, a lust of the eye, God abhors it, Psal. 10.3. he is so far from loving it, that he hates both it and the covetous man, Isa. 57.17. For the wickedness of his covetousness I was wrath with him; and for pride of life that God hates, Prov. 6.16, 17. it is one of the most loathsome things in the sight of God, 1 Pet. 5.5. [Greek or Hebrew], God wars against a proud man, he sets an army against him, and therefore seeing God hates these, he cannot be the Author or Fountain of them; it is manifest that they spring not from God, for he abhors them, hates them, punishes them, Job 34.9 10, 11, 12. Rom. 1.18, 19. Gal. 5.17. the flesh lusteth against the Spirit of God, therefore God is against them. But what is the reason why they cannot challenge their Original from God.

He doth not mean the Creatures of the world, but the Lusts of the world; Take it in particular, David when he had committed Adultery, which was a lust of the flesh, 2 Sam. 11.3. this was evill in the sight of the Lord, therefore it was not pleasing to him, he pleased himself, but not God in this; in other ⟨p. 119⟩things he was a man after Gods own heart, in this after his own heart. So what made Joseph abstain from the like sin, but because he considered it would be a great sin against God? so for Covetousnesse, a lust of the eye, God abhors it, Psal. 10.3. he is so far from loving it, that he hates both it and the covetous man, Isa. 57.17. For the wickedness of his covetousnesse I was wrath with him; and for pride of life that God hates, Prov. 6.16, 17. it is one of the most loathsome things in the sight of God, 1 Pet. 5.5. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, God warres against a proud man, he sets an army against him, and therefore seeing God hates these, he cannot be the Author or Fountaine of them; it is manifest that they spring not from God, for he abhors them, hates them, punishes them, Job 34.9 10, 11, 12. Rom. 1.18, 19. Gal. 5.17. the flesh lusteth against the Spirit of God, therefore God is against them. But what is the reason why they cannot challenge their Original from God.

Reas. 1. From the purity of God, Hab. 1.8. he is of pure eyes, and so abhors all sin; What fellowship hath light with darkness? what fellow ship hath filthy lusts of the flesh with a pure God? what fellowship hath a covetous heart with a liberal God, a proud heart with the great God? a proud man will be his first cause, and last end, and therefore hateful to God, Psal. 5.4, 5.

Reas. 1. From the purity of God, Hab. 1.8. he is of pure eyes, and so abhors all sin; What fellowship hath light with darknesse? what fellow ship hath filthy lusts of the flesh with a pure God? what fellowship hath a ••vetous heart with a liberal God, a proud heart with the great God? a proud man will be his first cause, and last end, and therefore hatefull to God, Psal. 5.4, 5.

Obj. Doth not the Scripture manifest that there is no sin, but God hath a great hand in it? why did Josephs Brethren fell him, was it not from envy, and from pride? and yet he saith it was God that fold him, Gen. 45.7.8. was it not from envy that the Pharisees crucified Christ? and yet it was but what God fore ordained; and for Judas, was it not from covetousness that he betrayed him? and yet God had decreed it; and for the lusts of the flesh, doth not God speak plainly, That he would give Davids wives into the hands of Absalom? so that no sin but it is from Gods hand, nor pride, nor covetousness, nor voluptuousness, how is it then that no lust can challenge its Original from God, they are not of the Father?

Obj. Doth not the Scripture manifest that there is no sin, but God hath a great hand in it? why did Josephs Brethren fell him, was it not from envy, and from pride? and yet he saith it was God that fold him, Gen. 45.7.8. was it not from envy that the Pharisees crucified Christ? and yet it was but what God fore ordained; and for Judas, was it not from covetousnesse that he betrayed him? and yet God had decreed it; and for the lusts of the flesh, doth not God speake plainly, That he would give Davids wives into the hands of Absalom? so that no sin but it is from Gods hand, nor pride, nor covetousnesse, nor voluptuousnesse, how is it then that no lust can challenge its Original from God, they are not of the Father?

Ans. They are of the Father as of the World, but not in that sense as they are of the World; they are not from him as an Author, or Fountain, or causa per se, for the good God can work no evil, but yet there is no sin but he is the occasion of it, though the cause of no sin; all good things come from God as a cause, all evil as from an occasion thereof; as the Gospel is a Gospel of peace, and from the God of Peace, yet it is made a fire-brand of contention, to set men at variance and strife, Mark 10. but it is not the proper work of the Gospel, but of the corrupt distemper of men that abuse it to the contrary end, there is no work of sin that doth per se propagate by God, but by occasion. Now, the accidental work of God in sin stands.

Ans. They are of the Father as of the World, but not in that sence as they are of the World; they are not from him as an Author, or Fountaine, or causa per se, for the good God can worke no evill, but yet there is no sin but he is the occasion of it, though the cause of no sin; all good things come from God as a cause, all evill as from an occasion thereof; as the Gospel is a Gospel of peace, and from the God of Peace, yet it is made a fire-brand of contention, to set men at variance and strife, Mark 10. but it is not the proper worke of the Gospel, but of the corrupt distemper of men that abuse it to the contrary end, there is no work of sin that doth per se propagate by God, but by occasion. Now, the accidental work of God in sin stands.

1 In a leaving men to themselves. 2 In leaving them to Satan. 3 In propounding good occasions, and objects which they pervert to sin.

First, So God would harden Pharaohs heart; How? by leaving him to himself, as wax left to it self will grow hard, how much more the stony heart of man? God not ruling and working in his heart, it grows hard.

First, So God would hearden Pharoahs heart; How? by leaving him to himself, as wax left to it selfe will grow hard, how much more the stony heart of man? God not ruling and working in his heart, it grows hard.

Secondly, He left him to Satan, he suffered Satan to help his South-sayers to do the like miracles as Moses did, Exod. 7.13.22. and because he saw his Enchanters could do so much, he thought they were no better than his Magicians.

Secondly, He left him to Satan, he suffered Satan to helpe his South-sayers to doe the like miracles as Moses did, Exod. 7.13.22. and because he saw his Enchanters could doe so much, he thought they were no better than his Magicians.

Thirdly, He hardens our hearts often by many comforts, mercies, and outward blessings, and these often harden our hearts, as respite from Judgements did Pharaohs, Exod. 8.15. when it should lead us to repentance, Rom. 2.4, 5. yet by occasion it hardens our hearts, so for other lusts.

How did God tempt Absalom? First, by leaving him to his lustful heart.

How did God tempt Absalom? First, by leaving him to his lustfull heart.

Secondly, By leaving him to ill counsel.

Secondly, By leaving him to ill counsell.

Thirdly, By giving the Kingdom into his hand, so that he took liberty to commit that wickednesses to lye with his Fathers Concubines. So, how did God work Josephs selling into Egypt?

Thirdly, By giving the Kingdome into his hand, so that he took liberty to commit that wickednesses to lye with his Fathers Concubines. So, how did God work Josephs selling into Egypt?

First, By turning his Fathers love towards him, above his other Brethren.

Secondly, By his dreams which stir them up to sell him, so that God, only gives the occasion, and propounds objects; which they abuse to sin; so God stirred up the Pharisees, and Judas, to Crucify and betray Christ, God left him to himself, then

Secondly, By his dreams which stirre them up to sell him, so that God, only gives the occasion, and propounds objects; which they abuse to sin; so God stirred up the Pharisees, and Judas, to Crucifie and betray Christ, God left him to himselfe, then

1 Satan filled his heart, Joh. 13.2.27. and God gave a fit opportunity to take him; so the Pharisees they envied him, they saw he would take away their glory and credit, therefore they envied him, but those were but such occasions as they might have resisted, he laid them by them, but rhey needed not have taken them up, he tried them by it, but he did not tempt them to do it. So Adams sin, God led him into a Temptation, but it was but of trial, not of seducement, it was Temptatio probationis, not seductionis, he propounded a goodly tree to him, and the fruit fair to the eye, but the cause of all was their own consent, and mutability, which they might have resisted.

1 Satan fil'd his heart, Joh. 13.2.27. and God gave a fit opportunity to take him; so the Pharisees they envied him, they saw he would take away their glory and credit, therefore they envied him, but those were but such occasions as they might have resisted, he laid them by them, but rhey needed not have taken them up, he tryed them by it, but he did not tempt them to doe it. So Adams sin, God led him into a Temptation, but it was but of trial, not of seducement, it was Temptatio probationis, not seductionis, he propounded a goodly tree to him, and the fruit faire to the eye, but the cause of all was their own consent, and mutability, which they might have resisted.