A89737:332
The orthodox evangelist. Or A treatise wherein many great evangelical truths (not a few…
The orthodox evangelist. Or A treatise wherein many great evangelical truths (not a few whereof are much opposed and eclipsed in this perilous hour of the passion of the Gospel) are briefly discussed, cleared, and confirmed: as a further help, for the begetting, and establishing of the faith which is in Jesus. As also the state of the blessed, where; of the condition of their souls from the instant of their dissolution: and of their persons after their resurrection. By John Norton, teacher of the church at Ipswich in New England.The orthodox evangelist. Or A treatise wherein many great evangelical truths (not a few whereof are much opposed and eclipsed in this perillous hour of the passion of the Gospel) are briefly discussed, cleared, and confirmed: as a further help, for the begeting, and establishing of the faith which is in Jesus. As also the state of the blessed, where; of the condition of their souls from the instant of their dissolution: and of their persons after their resurrection. By John Norton, teacher of the church at Ipswich in New England.
London: printed by John Macock for Henry Cripps, 1654
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
For satisfaction of the Objection we must distinguish of Necessity. There is a necessity of Coaction, and a necessity of Infallibility: Sin followeth not the Decree by a necessity of Coaction or Compulsion, in which sense the Objection only holdeth; but by a necessity of Infallibility, (which consisteth with, and hindereth not the liberty of sin, of which afterwards:) Hence the Decree, though it be the antecedent, that is, the foregoer of sin, yet it is not the cause of sin; and sin, though it be the consequent, that is, somewhat infallibly following upon the Decree, yet it is not the effect thereof. The day goeth before the following night, and the night foregoeth the following day; yet night and day are far from being causes one of another. The diligent attending to the difference between an Antecedent and a Cause, and between a Consequent and an Effect (for the clearing of which sufficient hath been spoken before) is of great use to untie many knots in this place.
For satisfaction of the Objection we must distinguish of Necessity. There is a necessity of Coaction, and a necessity of Infallibility: Sin followeth not the Decree by a necessity of Coaction or Compulsion, in which sence the Objection only holdeth; but by a necessity of Infallibility, (which consisteth with, and hindereth not the liberty of sin, of which afterwards:) Hence the Decree, though it be the antecedent, that is, the foregoer of sin, yet it is not the cause of sin; and sin, though it be the consequent, that is, somewhat infallibly following upon the Decree, yet it is not the effect thereof. The day goeth before the following night, and the night foregoeth the following day; yet night and day are far from being causes one of another. The diligent attending to the difference between an Antecedent and a Cause, and between a Consequent and an Effect (for the clearing of which sufficient hath been spoken before) is of great use to unty many knots in this place.
But meeting here with this Satanical and abominable Sophism, of imputing unto God, the being of the Author of sin; ⟨p. 62⟩it will not be unseasonable to remove other Arguments disputing for the same Conclusion, though not all of them upon the same grounds.