Again, whereas the right of God in stirring up a creature to this purpose to show his power on him, though it be in his hardening, and overthrow; this right I say, or rather the exercise of this right in God, is confined to a sinful creature, this is quite besides the Apostles Text; For albeit the creatures he speaketh of (as Pharaoh and the rebellious Israelites) were sinful creatures, yet it doth not follow that the Apostle in the ⟨p. 278⟩Doctrine which here he delivereth, taketh any notice of their sinfulness; As indeed it is apparent that he doth not justify Gods courses here mentioned upon the consideration of their sinfulness, but only upon the consideration of Gods Sovereignty over his creatures. And indeed it is plain, that of two sinners God can give the grace of raising from sin to whom he will, and deny it unto the other: so it is manifest that of two creatures standing in the estate of grace; God can maintain the one in that estate by his corroborating grace, and by denying the same grace, permit the other to fall from that estate of innocency wherein he stood; As it is clear in the difference that God put betwixt the Angels that stood, to wit, his elect Angels,) and those that fell; they that stood being amplius adjuti, more succoured then the other, as Austin professeth, De Civ. Dei, lib. 12. cap. 9. And Coquaeus at large upon him. So that in this respect the denying of corroborating grace to those Angels that fell, while before they were without sin, was just with God; not in any reference unto their works, as if they had deserved that God should permit them to fall into sin, it being impossible that any creature should deserve this. For in this case there should be acknowledged a sin to precede the first sin, which cannot be avouched, without manifest contradiction. But it is just in respect of Gods Sovereignty to keep from sin whom he will, and to permit whom he will to fall into sin.
Again, whereas the right of God in stirring up a creature to this purpose to shew his power on him, though it bee in his hardning, and overthrow; this right I say, or rather the exercise of this right in God, is confined to a sinfull creature, this is quite besides the Apostles Text; For albeit the creatures hee speaketh of (as Pharaoh and the rebellious Israelites) were sinfull creatures, yet it doth not follow that the Apostle in the ⟨p. 278⟩Doctrine which here hee delivereth, taketh any notice of their sinfulnesse; As indeed it is apparent that hee doth not justifie Gods courses here mentioned upon the consideration of their sinfulnesse, but only upon the consideration of Gods Soveraignty over his creatures. And indeed it is plain, that of two sinners God can give the grace of raising from sin to whom hee will, and deny it unto the other: so it is manifest that of two creatures standing in the estate of grace; God can maintain the one in that estate by his corroborating grace, and by denying the same grace, permit the other to fall from that estate of innocency wherein hee stood; As it is clear in the difference that God put betwixt the Angels that stood, to wit, his elect Angels,) and those that fell; they that stood being amplius adjuti, more succoured then the other, as Austin professeth, De Civ. Dei, lib. 12. cap. 9. And Coquaeus at large upon him. So that in this respect the denying of corroborating grace to those Angels that fell, while before they were without sin, was just with God; not in any reference unto their works, as if they had deserved that God should permit them to fall into sin, it being impossible that any creature should deserve this. For in this case there should bee acknowledged a sin to precede the first sin, which cannot bee avouched, without manifest contradiction. But it is just in respect of Gods Soveraignty to keep from sin whom heo will, and to permit whom hee will to fall into sin.
