A39674:954
Planelogia, a succinct and seasonable discourse of the occasions, causes, nature, rise, growth, and…
Planelogia, a succinct and seasonable discourse of the occasions, causes, nature, rise, growth, and remedies of mental errors written some months since, and now made public, both for the healing and prevention of the sins and calamities which have broken in this way upon the churches of Christ, to the great scandal of religion, hardening of the wicked, and obstruction of Reformation : whereunto are subjoined by way of appendix : I. Vindiciarum vindex, being a succinct, but full answer to Mr. Philip Cary's weak and impertinent exceptions to my Vindiciæ legis & fæderis, II. a synopsis of ancient and modern Antinomian errors, with scriptural arguments and reasons against them, III. a sermon composed for the preventing and healing of rents and divisions in the churches of Christ / by John Flavell ... ; with an epistle by several divines, relating to Dr. Crisp's works.Planelogia, a succinct and seasonable discourse of the occasions, causes, nature, rise, growth, and remedies of mental errors written some months since, and now made publick, both for the healing and prevention of the sins and calamities which have broken in this way upon the churches of Christ, to the great scandal of religion, hardening of the wicked, and obstruction of Reformation : whereunto are subjoined by way of appendix : I. Vindiciarum vindex, being a succinct, but full answer to Mr. Philip Cary's weak and impertinent exceptions to my Vindiciæ legis & fæderis, II. a synopsis of ancient and modern Antinomian errors, with scriptural arguments and reasons against them, III. a sermon composed for the preventing and healing of rents and divisions in the churches of Christ / by John Flavell ... ; with an epistle by several divines, relating to Dr. Crisp's works.
London: printed by R. Roberts for Tho. Cockerill, 1691
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.) This Assertion is inconsistent with God's Providential Dispensations to his People. When David, a justified Believer, had sinned against him in the matter of Uriah, it is said, 2 Sam. 11. 27. The thing that David had done, displeased the Lord: and as the effect of that displeasure, it's said, Chap. 12. 15. The Lord struck the Child that Uriah's Wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. Among the Corinthians some that should not be condemned with the World, were judged and chastened of the Lord for their undue approaches to his Table, 1 Cor. 11. 32. Now I would ask the Antinomian these two Questions. (1. Qu.) Whether it can be denied, that David under the Old Testament, and these Corinthians under the New, were justified Persons; and yet the former stricken by God in his Child, with its sickness and death; and the latter in like manner smitten by God in their own persons; and both for their respective sins committed against God; and yet God saw ⟨p. 363⟩no sin in them? Did God smite them for sin, and yet beheld no sin them? Beware lest in ascribing such strokes to god, you strike at once both at his Omniscience and Justice. (2. Qu.) How God upon Confession and Repentance can be said to put away his People's sins (as Nathan there assures David he had done) when in the mean time he saw no sin in him, either to chastise him for, or to pardon in him? Do you think that God's Afflictions or Pardons are blind-fold Acts, done at random? how inconsistent is this with Divine Dispensations?
(2.) This Assertion is inconsistent with God's Providential Dispensations to his People. When David, a justified Believer, had sinned against him in the matter of Vriah, it is said, 2 Sam. 11. 27. The thing that David had done, displeased the Lord: and as the effect of that displeasure, it's said, Chap. 12. 15. The Lord struck the Child that Uriah's Wife bare unto David, and it was very sick. Among the Corinthians some that should not be condemned with the World, were judged and chastened of the Lord for their undue approaches to his Table, 1 Cor. 11. 32. Now I would ask the Antinomian these two Questions. (1. Qu.) Whether it can be denied, that David under the Old Testament, and these Corinthians under the New, were justified Persons; and yet the former stricken by God in his Child, with its sickness and death; and the latter in like manner smitten by God in their own persons; and both for their respective sins committed against God; and yet God saw