A64003:176
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…
A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certain doubts concerning predestination together with an examination thereof / written by William Twice ...A treatise of Mr. Cottons clearing certaine doubts concerning predestination together with an examination thereof / written by William Twisse ...
London: printed by J.D. for Andrew Crook, 1646
AN EXAMINATION of a Treatise written by Master Cotton, for the clea… › QUESTION •.
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.
10. It is untrue, that it is Gods good pleasure that all should repent; for the will of Gods good pleasure, in the acception of all that ever I read, is only of that which God will have come to pass; and consequently, of what shall come to pass; not of what should come to pass, to wit, of mans duty; that is generally accounted voluntas signi, in distinction from voluntas beneplaciti; and in special, we may call it voluntas praecepti, and distinguish ⟨p. 61⟩it from voluntas propositi; this is, What God will have to be done; that is, what God will have to be our duty to do: And thus far it may be accounted the will of Gods good pleasure (as you call it.) But then, Gods displeasure following hath no congruous opposition hereunto; as when you say, It is his displeasure if they repent not: the contrary whereunto is not as you shape it, It is his good pleasure that all men should repent; but rather thus, It is his good pleasure if they do repent. That distinction tends to mere confusion. Neither yet do I like this expression, shaped never so congruously: rather it should run thus, God is well pleased when men do repent, and most displeased when they do not repent; which is most true, but least to the present purpose, as touching the distinction ventilated between us, concerning voluntas signi, & voluntas beneplaciti.
10. It is untrue, that it is Gods good pleasure that all should repent; for the will of Gods good pleasure, in the acception of all that ever I read, is onely of that which God will have come to passe; and consequently, of what shall come to passe; not of what should come to passe, to wit, of mans duty; that is generally accounted voluntas signi, in distinction from voluntas beneplaciti; and in speciall, wee may call it voluntas praecepti, and distinguish ⟨p. 61⟩it from voluntas propositi; this is, What God will have to bee done; that is, what God will have to be our duty to doe: And thus farre it may be accounted the will of Gods good pleasure (as you call it.) But then, Gods displeasure following hath no congruous opposition hereunto; as when you say, It is his displeasure if they repent not: the contrary whereunto is not as you shape it, It is his good pleasure that all men should repent; but rather thus, It is his good pleasure if they doe repent. That distinction tends to meere confusion. Neither yet doe I like this expression, shaped never so congruously: rather it should runne thus, God is well pleased when men doe repent, and most displeased when they doe not repent; which is most true, but least to the present purpose, as touching the distinction ventilated betweene us, concerning voluntas signi, & voluntas beneplaciti.