A41521:133
A discourse of the true nature of the Gospel demonstrating that it is no…
A discourse of the true nature of the Gospel demonstrating that it is no new law, but a pure doctrine of grace : in answer to the Reverend Mr. Lorimer's Apology / by Tho. Goodwin ...
London: printed by J. Darby, 1695
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
If any one will peremptorily deny Repentance to have been Adam's Duty before God had promised Mercy, the same Person must consequently assert, that it was no Fault in him to run from God; that he did very well in excusing himself, in throwing the great Part of the Guilt upon God, in standing upon his own Justification; and that if he had continued an obdurate hardened Wretch, if he had acted as a bold desperate Rebel, and instead of confessing his Crimes, and expressing his Sorrow, had further dared and outbraved offended Justice, he had been innocent in all this, and had not in the least broken any Precept of the Law, nor transgressed the Bounds of his Duty. For if Repentance was not commanded before the Gospel published, then the worst Impenitence in Adam would have been no Sin, because forbidden by no Law.
If any one will peremptorily deny Repentance to have been Adam's Duty before God had promis'd Mercy, the same Person must consequently assert, that it was no Fault in him to run from God; that he did very well in excusing himself, in throwing the great Part of the Guilt upon God, in standing upon his own Justification; and that if he had continued an obdurate harden'd Wretch, if he had acted as a bold desperate Rebel, and instead of confessing his Crimes, and expressing his Sorrow, had further dar'd and outbrav'd offended Justice, he had been innocent in all this, and had not in the least broken any Precept of the Law, nor transgress'd the Bounds of his Duty. For if Repentance was not commanded before the Gospel publish'd, then the worst Impenitence in Adam would have been no Sin, because forbidden by no Law.
I know very well that Arminius boldly affirms all this;a That the Covenant of Works being broken, the Law was abrogated too, and that God no longer required Obedience from his sinful Creature, till he brought in a new Law, which is the Gospel, commanding Faith and Repentance; and that God accepts this Obedience to the Precepts of this his new Law, instead of perfect Obedience to the old violated Moral Law. But I know too very well, that most prodigious and amazing Absurdities will be the natural Products of