A92141:48
Influences of the life of grace
Influences of the life of grace. Or, A practical treatise concerning the way, manner, and means of having and improving of spiritual dispositions, and quickening influences from Christ the resurrection and the life. By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews in Scotland.Influences of the life of grace. Or, A practical treatise concerning the way, manner, and means of having and improving of spiritual dispositions, and quickning influences from Christ the resurrection and the life. By Samuel Rutherfurd, Professor of Divinity in the Vniversity of St. Andrews in Scotland.
London: printed by T.C. for Andrew Crook, 1659
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.
And 1. we say Adam not through defect or want of the Lords holy predetermination, as if therefore, ideo, for that cause he sinned, because the Lord did withdraw his influences; but the adequate, culpable moral cause of Adams sinning, and of his choosing of a vicious action (for Adam in sinning is only and properly a moral cause under a law) is his own free-will, freely declining from the rule; there is no defect or moral want of Gods predetermination, because the sovereign Lord, who is above a law, was not obliged to join his praedeterminating influence to Adam, but rather obliged to withdraw his predetermination from the man, who in the same moment of time was willing to want that predetermination; for God out of holy sovereignty withdraws in the same moment his influence, in which Adam sinfully rejects the same influence.
And 1. we say Adam not through defect or want of the Lords holy praedetermination, as if therefore, ideo, for that cause he sinned, because the Lord did withdraw his influences; but the adequate, culpable moral cause of Adams sinning, and of his chosing of a vitious action (for Adam in sinning is only and properly a moral cause under a law) is his own free-will, freely declining from the rule; there is no defect or moral want of Gods praedetermination, because the soveraign Lord, who is above a law, was not obliged to joyn his praedeterminating influence to Adam, but rather obliged to withdraw his praedetermination from the man, who in the same moment of time was willing to want that praedetermination; for God out of holy soveraignty withdraws in the same moment his influence, in which Adam sinfully rejects the same influence.
3. This Adversary, if he would turn the word ratio, reason, into the word cause, or concurrence, would see himself at a loss; it will follow that the cause why Adam sinned, is because God denied his causative concurrence, and so the Argument shall hurt his cause; for the concurrence of God is causative, then must the Lords withdrawing of his concurring influence be the collateral cause of Adams sinning, except he say that man hath in his power the concurrence of God, and if so, Adam and all mens free-will must be Lord of omnipotency and omnipotent concurrences, and then why but God must rather make prayers and requests to our free-will to incline and move his omnipotency to concur