A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certain doubts concerning predestination together with an examination…A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certaine doubts concerning predestination together with an examination…

For if it be the cause of Gods purpose; then either by necessity of nature, or by the free constitution of God: not by necessity of nature; for he is naturally more prone (as Piscator confesseth upon Exod. 24. 6.) to remunerate obedience, than to punish for sin: but no man will say, that he doth remunerate by necessity of nature; therefore neither doth he punish sin by necessity of nature: therefore it must be only through the voluntary constitution of God, that sin is the cause of ordination unto condemnation. But mark, I pray, the foul absurdity hereof; for here-hence it follows, that God did purpose that upon the fore-sight of sin he would purpose that men should be damned. So that the purpose of God is made the object of his purpose; and that upon a certain condition: whereas nothing can be the object of Gods purpose, but some temporal thing or other; and consequently, one purpose of God shall be in time precedaneous to another purpose of God; which is impossible: first, because no purpose of God begins in time: secondly, there is no priority between the purposes of God, but priority of nature and reason; and that only in such a case as when one is of the end, and the other of the means tending to that end; which hath no place in this matter we now treat of. By the way, when you say, God cannot condemn the creature without sin, though he may annihilate him; what do you mean by condemnation? do you take it for punishment? If so, then the formality of it, expressed at full, is this; Affliction for sin. Now ⟨p. 50⟩consider, is it a sober speech to say, God cannot afflict for sin, without the presupposall of sin? I doubt not but you deliver your mind, of what God cannot do, in the way of justice: But it is utterly impossible that any man should be afflicted for sin without the presupposall of sin: I presume your meaning is only this, (though incommodiously expressed) God cannot excruciate or afflict a creature without the presupposall of sin. But in whom? I doubt not but your meaning is, in the person afflicted. But what think you then of the Son of God, how was he afflicted, and without any presupposall of sin in him? And I pray you tell me, hath not God as much power over us as over him? Again, consider I pray, what power doth God give unto man over inferior creatures? But let this pass:

For if it be the cause of Gods purpose; then either by necessity of nature, or by the free constitution of God: not by necessity of nature; for hee is naturally more prone (as Piscator confesseth upon