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…

For first, you feign the rigour of that which was objected to consist in a certain manner of Gods hardening: to wit, by his irresistible will; As if the Apostle did give us to understand, that there is a double kind of hardening, that is imputed unto God. The one by his irresistible will; the other is not expressed by you, but intimated to consist in hardening by his will resistible, whereas no such distinction is either expressed or insinuated by ⟨p. 282⟩the Apostle, neither do you once go about to prove it. And the distinction it self is very absurd; both in bringing in a will of God resistible, whereas the Apostle supposeth the will of God in hardening to be irresistible, without all distinction; neither doth he give any the least intimation of a twofold hardening used by God, or imputable to him. He plainly professeth, that as God hath mercy on whom he will, so he hardeneth whom he will, without all distinction. And you may as well distinguish Gods showing of mercy, as if that were twofold; one by his will resistible, another by his will irresistible; For showing mercy and hardening are made opposite by the Apostle. And it is a well known rule in Schools, that Quot modis dicitur unum oppositorum, tot modis dicetur & alterum, of two opposites, look how many ways the one is taken, so many ways may the other be taken. And upon this Doctrine of the Apostle, ariseth the objection to this effect. That seeing Gods will is irresistible in hardening a man; it seems unreasonable that God should complain of such a mans rebellion and disobedience whom himself hath hardened, supposing that they cannot obey God who are hardened. And throughout this objection also, there is no colour of any such distinction as you introduce at pleasure, concerning Gods will, as either resistible or irresistible, and accordingly as concerning the different manner of Gods obduration, to wit, either by his resistible will, or by his irresistible will.

For first, you feign the rigour of that which was objected to consist in a certain manner of Gods hardning: to wit, by his irresistible will; As if the Apostle did give us to understand, that there is a double kinde of hardning, that is imputed unto God. The one by his irresistible will; the other is not expressed by you, but intimated to consist in hardning by his will resistible, whereas no such distinction is either expressed or insinuated by ⟨p. 282⟩