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…

Answer, But say further, that this hardening of Pharaoh, be an effect of the like hatred of Pharaoh as of Esau; neither is it said to depend on the sin of Pharaoh, but on the will of God, as mercy doth, as the first cause thereof.

Answer, But say further, that this hardning of Pharaoh, bee an effect of the like hatred of Pharaoh as of Esau; neither is it said to depend on the sin of Pharaoh, but on the will of God, as mercy doth, as the first cause thereof.

I answer, this hardening of Pharaoh, though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh, yet it is not an immediate effect of the like hatred he bare to Esau, before he had done good or evil, but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh, viz. his malicious hatred of Gods Church coming between. God hateth no man so far as to harden him, till he hath fallen into some sin, in which, and for which he may be hardened. Hardening being always (as far as I can perceive by Scripture) not only a sin, and cause of sin, but a punishment of sin.

I answer, this hardning of Pharaoh, though an effect of Gods hatred of Pharaoh, yet it is not an immediate effect of the like hatred hee bare to Esau, before hee had done good or evill, but presupposeth the sin of Pharaoh, viz. his malitious hatred of Gods Church comming between. God hateth no man so farre as to harden him, till hee hath fallen into some sin, in which, and for which hee may bee hardned. Hardning being alwaies (as far as I can perceive by Scripture) not only a sin, and cause of sin, but a punishment of sin.

How can God be said to punish sin with sin, in hardening the creature, if sin in Pharaoh be not presupposed to go before the hardening? It is true indeed, this hardening of Pharaoh is referred by the Apostle to the will of God as the first cause thereof: For otherwise the answer of the Apostle had not been sufficient to the objection propounded, ver. 14. for there it was objected that unrighteousness might seem to be found in God, even respect of persons to deal so unequally with persons equal, such as Jacob and Esau were; for if Jacob and Esau had done neither good, nor evil, when God had exalted the younger to the participation of his free love, and to sovereignty over his Brother, and depressed the elder to the condition of a servant, and as a servant reserved for him just dealing, but not fatherly love; might not this seem an unequal partiality with God, to deal so unequally with persons equal? To resolve this doubt, the Apostle could not have cleared God from unrighteousness by pleading the sin of Esau, which deserved that he should be so dealt withal, for neither did Jacobs sin deserve better; and besides the Apostle had said before, God gave out these Oracles which pronounced his different respect of them without all consideration of good or evil in either of them; viz. before they had done either good or evil. Therefore to satisfy the objection, and clear Gods righteousness, the Apostle wisely allegeth testimony of Scripture, to prove Gods absolute power and ability, to show mercy on whom he will, and whom he will to harden.