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…

First, I presume your meaning is God did not restrain his covetousness, for this seems to be the meaning of this phrase, Psal. 81. where it is said, God gave them over to their own hearts lusts, and by way of explication it is added, And let them follow their own inventions. Now this course of providence was not sufficient to bring it to pass, that Judas should betray him. For this is only to let him do what he will in the course of his covetousness. Now though Judas was left to do what he would in the way of satisfying his covetous course, yet it doth not follow hereupon that Judas should betray Christ. Therefore Arminius to this decree of God, presupposeth not Judas his covetousness only, but his will to betray Christ, as much as to say, God foreseeing he would betray him, decreed he should betray him. To this construction of Gods decree you come too near, though you do not deliver your self thereof so plainly as he doth, nor so plausibly. But the mischief is, it is now confessed on all hands; that the very act of willing is wrought by God, and consequently was decreed by God. Now upon what condition presupposed did God decree that Judas should will the betraying of Christ? was it upon the foresight of his will? If so, then also upon the presupposition of Judas his will to do this, God did work his will to do this; which is flat contradiction, in making Judas his will to do this, to go before his will to do this. Besides, what need was there for God to work his will to do this, when his will to ⟨p. 254⟩do this is already presupposed? Bellarmine goes another way to work, and confessing that God decreed that Christ should be betrayed and crucified, yet denies that he decreed that any should betray and crucify him. Christs suffering was decreed and his patience therein, but not their sin in putting him upon suffering. Your interpretation is less plain then theirs, but equally with theirs removed from the truth. Punishment of sin alway presupposeth (I confess) sin; but I deny that the decree of punishing sin presupposeth sin. If this argument were right; then it would follow, that because to reward with everlasting life, presupposeth good works, Gods decree to reward with everlasting life, presupposeth good works; which is as much to say that election presupposeth good works.

First, I presume your meaning is God did not restrain his covetousnesse, for this seems to bee the meaning of this phrase,