A64003:336
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
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.
But how do you prove that Pharaohs hardening was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which God bare to Esau? to wit, because it presupposed sin. But I deny this Argument, neither do you (discoursing at large) give your self to the proving of it; but only suppose it. By the same reason you might say, that salvation is not the immediate effect of election unto salvation; because salvation in men of ripe years presupposeth faith, repentance and good works.
But how doe you prove that Pharaohs hardening was not an immediate effect of the like hatred which God bare to Esau? to wit, because it presupposed sin. But I deny this Argument, neither doe you (discoursing at large) give your selfe to the proving of it; but onely suppose it. By the same reason you might say, that salvation is not the immediate effect of election unto salvation; because salvation in men of ripe years presupposeth faith, repentance and good workes.
Nay, you may as well say, that Gods giving of grace, is not an immediate effect of Gods love to any man; because in most men of ripe years it presupposeth many good works. In Saul it presupposed his zeal and his righteousness according to the Law, which was unblameable. If you say that Sauls righteousness, whatsoever it was before his calling was no fruit of his love: I may with more probability affirm, that Pharaohs sin which preceded his obduration, was no effect of Gods hatred. If you say, that though such righteousness in Saul was no moving cause to God to give him saving grace: In like manner I say, that no sin in Pharaoh was a moving cause in God to deny him saving grace: For if it were, then either by necessity of nature, ⟨p. 190⟩or by the constitution of God. Not by necessity of nature; for undoubtedly God could have pardoned this sin of his, and changed his heart, as well as he pardoned the sins of Manasseh, the sins of the Jews in crucifying the son of God, Act. 2. the sins of Saul in persecuting Gods Saints; and changed all their hearts. Nor by any constitution of God; for show me if you can any such constitution of God. And if you would but explicate wherein the hardening of Pharaoh did consist, I presume it would clearly appear, that the mere pleasure of Gods will is the cause of it; like as it is the mere pleasure of God that he doth not harden others in like manner: But when we carry our selves in the clouds of generalities, we are very apt to deceive not others only, (if they will be deceived) but our selves also. Again, you seem to speak of Pharaohs hardening mentioned