reward, rather upon the account of supporting and cheering our spirits in the deficiencies, temptations, and entanglements attending our obedience, than directly to engage unto obedience (though consequently it doth that also), whereunto we have so many other unconquerable engagements and inducements; yet the consideration thereof in that sense also, as it moves the wills of men to actions suitable to the attainment of it, is very well consistent with the doctrine, in hand. That old calumny, a hundred times repeated and insisted on in this contest, of our wills being necessitated and deprived of their choice and election, unless it could be tolerably made good, will be of no use to Mr. Goodwin as to his present purpose. The whole strength of this argumentation is built on this supposal; That the effectual grace of God in its working the will and deed in believers, or the Spirit's doing of it by grace, with God's fore-determination of events, doth take away the liberty of the will, inducing into it a necessary manner of operation, determining it to one, antecedently in order of time to its own determination of itself, which is false, and no wise inferred from the doctrine under consideration. Yea, as God's providential concurrence with men and determination of their wills, to all their actions as actions is the principle of all their natural liberty; so his gracious concurrence with them, or operations in them, as unto scriptural effects, working in them to will, is the principle of all their true spiritual liberty: when the Son makes us free, then are we free indeed.' The reward then is proposed to an understanding enlightened, a will quickened and made free by grace, to stir them up to actions suitable to them, who are in expectation of so bountiful a close of their obedience: (which actions are yet wrought in them by the Spirit of God, whose fruits they are) and this to very good purpose, in the hearts of all that know what it is to walk with God, and to serve him in the midst of temptations, unless they are under the power of some such particular error, as turns away their eyes from believing the truth.

Secondly, The opposition here pretended between a physical necessitating, and a moral inducement, for the producing of the same effect, is in plain terms intended between the efficacy of God's internal grace, and the use of external exhortations and motives; if God give an internal principle, or spiritual habit, fitting for, inclining to, spiritua1

actions and duties; if he follows the work so begun in us (who yet of ourselves can do nothing, nor are sufficient to think a good thought) with continual supplies of his Spirit and grace,' working daily in us according to the exceeding greatness of his power, the things that are well pleasing in his sight,' then, though he work upon us, as creatures endued with reason, understandings, wills, and affections, receiving glory from us according to the nature he hath endued us withal, all exhortations and encouragements to obedience required at our hands, are vain and foolish; now because we think this to be the very wisdom of God, and the opposition made unto it to be a mere invention of Satan, to magnify' corrupted nature, and decry all the efficacy of the grace of the new covenant, we must have something besides and beyond the naked assertion of our author, to cause us once to believe it.

Thirdly, The great execution that is made by moral inducement solely, without any internally efficacious grace, in the way of gospel obedience, is often supposed, but not once attempted to be put upon the proof or demonstration; it shall then suffice to deny that any persuasions, outward motives, or inducements whatever, are able of themselves to raise, engage, and carry out, the will unto action, so that any good spiritual action should be brought forth on that account, without the effectual influence and physical operation of internal grace; and Mr. Goodwin is left to prove it, together with such other assertions derogatory to the free grace of God, dogmatically imposed upon his reader in this chapter, whereof some have been already remarked, and others may in due time. The residue of this section (the 13th), spent to prove that eternal life is given as a reward to perseverance, having already manifested the full consistency of the proposition, in a gospel acceptation of the word 'reward,' with whatever we teach of the perseverance of the saints, I suppose myself unconcerned in: and, therefore, passing by the triumphant conclusion of this argument asserting an absolute power in men to exhibit or, decline from, obedience, I shall go on to that, which, in my apprehension, is of more importance, and will give occasion to a discourse, I hope, not unuseful or unprofitable to the reader; I shall therefore assign it a peculiar place and chapter to itself.

CHAP. XV.

Mr. G.'s fifth argument for the apostacy of true believers. The weight of this argument taken from the sins of believers. The difference between the sins of believers and unregenerate persons proposed to consideration, James i. 14, 15. The rise and progress of lust and sin. The fountain of all sin, in all persons, is lust, Rom. vii. 7. Observations clearing the difference between regenerate and unregenerate persons in their sinning, as to the common fountain of all sin: the first. The second, of the universality of lust in the soul by nature. The third, in two inferences : the first, unregeneráte men sin with their whole consent. The second inference concerning the reign of sin, and reigning sin. The fourth, concerning the universal possession of the soul by renewing grace. The fifth, that true grace bears rule wherever it be. Inferences from the former considerations. The first, that in every regenerate person there are diverse principles of all moral operations: Rom. vii. 19, 20. opened. The second, that sin cannot reign in a regenerate person. The third, that reAnswer to the argugenerate persons sin not with their whole consent. ment at the entrance proposed. Believers never sin with their whole consent and wills. Mr. G.'s attempt to remove the answer. His exceptions considered and removed. Plurality of wills in the same person, in the Scripture sense of the opposition between flesh and spirit: that no regenerate person sins with his full consent, proved. Of the Spirit, and his lustings in us. The actings of the Spirit in us free, not suspended on any conditions in us. The same farther manifested. Mr. G.'s discourse of the first and second motions of the Spirit considered. The same considerations farther carried on. Peter Martyr's testimony considered. Rom. vii. 19, 20. considered. Difference between the opposition made to sin in persons regenerate, and that in persons unregenerate, farther argued. Of the sense of Rom. vii. and in what sense believers do the works of the flesh. The close of these considerations. The answer to the argument at the entrance of the chapter opened. The argument new formed: the major proposition limited, and granted, and the minor denied. The proof of the major considered: Gal. v. 21. Eph. v. 5, 6. 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. Believers how concerned in comminations. Threatening proper to unbelievers for their sins. Farther objections proposed and removed. Of the progress of saints intempting to sin. The effect of lust in temptations. Difference between regenerate and unregenerate persons as to the tempting of lust, 1. in respect of universality; 2. of power. Objections answered. Whether believers sin only out of infirmity. Whether believers may sin out of malice, and with deliberation. Of the state of believers, who upon their sin may be excommunicated. Whether the body of Christ may dismembered. What body of Christ it is that is intended. Mr. G.'s thoughts to this purpose examined. Mr. G.'s discourse of the way whereby Christ keeps or may keep his members examined. Members of Christ cannot become members of Satan: 1 Cor. vi. 15. considered, of the sense

be

and use of the word ãpaç. Christ takes members out of the power of Satan, gives up none to him. Repetition of regeneration asserted by the doctrine of apostacy. The repetition disproved. Mr. G's notion of regeneration examined at large and rebuked. Relation between God and his children indissoluble. The farther progress of lust for the production of sin; it draws off, and entangles: drawing away, what it is. The distance between regenerate and unregenerate persons in their being drawn away by lust. Farther description of him who is drawn away by lust; and of the difference formerly mentioned. Of lusts enticing. How far this may befall regenerate men. To do sin, Rom. vii. what it intendeth. Lusts conceiving, wherein it consists. Of the bringing forth of sin, and how far the saints of God may proceed therein. 1 John iii. 9. opened: the scope of the place discovered: vindicated. The words farther opened. The proposition in the words universal: inferences from thence. The subject of that proposition considered, every one that is born of God, what is affirmed of them. What meant by committing of sin. Mr. G.'s opposition to the sense of that expression given. Reasons for the confirmation of it. Mr. G.'s reasons against it, proposed and considered. The farther exposition of the word carried on: how he that is born of God cannot sin: several kinds of impossibility. Mr. G.'s attempt to answer the argument from this place, particularly examined. The reasons of the proposition in the text considered: of the seed of God abideth: the nature of that seed, what it is, wherein it consists. Of the abiding of this seed. Of the latter part of the apostle's reason, he is born of God: our argument from the words. Mr. G.'s endeavour to evade that argument; his exposition of the words removed. Farther of the meaning of the word abideth. The close.

MR. Goodwin's fifth argument for the saints' apostacy, is taken from the consideration of the sins which they have fallen into, or possibly may so do, and it is thus proposed, sect. 20.

"They who are in a capacity, or possibility of perpetrating the works of the flesh, are in a possibility of perishing, and consequently in a possibility of falling away, and that finally from the grace and favour of God, in case they be in an estate of his grace and favour at the present; but the saints, or true believers, are in a possibility of perpetrating the works of the flesh, and therefore also they are in a possibility of perishing, and so of falling away from the grace and favour of God, wherein at present they stand. The major proposition of this argument, to wit, they who are in a possibility of perpetrating, or customarily acting the works of the flesh, are in a possibility of perishing, is clearly proved

from all such Scriptures which exclude all workers of iniquity, and fulfillers of the lusts of the flesh from the kingdom of God; of which sort are many; of the which, saith the apostle, speaking of the lusts of the flesh, adultery, fornication, &c. I tell you, as I have also told you in times past, that they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God; so again, For this ye know, that no whoremonger, or unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolator, hath any inheritance of the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience: yet again, Know ye not that the unrighteous shall never inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters shall inherit the kingdom of God. From such passages as these, which are very frequent in the Scriptures, it is as clear as the light of the sun at noon-day, that they who may possibly commit such sins as those specified, adultery, fornication, idolatry, may as possibly perish and be for ever excluded the kingdom of God.'

Ans. Because of all arguments whatever used against the truth we assert, this seems to me to wear the best colours on its back, and to have its face best painted; viz. with that plea of the 'inconsistency of sin with the favour and acception of God' seeming to have a tendency to caution believers in their ways and walkings, to be more careful in watching against temptations, I shall more largely insist on what the Lord hath been pleased to reveal concerning the sins and failings of such as he is yet pleased to accept in a covenant of mercy, whom though he chastens and sorely rebukes, yet he gives not their souls over unto death, nor takes his loving-kindness from them for ever;' now because the inside and strength of this objection, consists in a comparison instituted between the sins of believers, and the sins of unregenerate persons, which being laid in the balance are found of equal burdensomeness unto God, and therefore are in expectance of a like reward from him, I shall in the first place, before I come in particular to answer the argument proposed, manifest the difference that is between regenerate persons and unregenerate in their sinning, and consequently also between their sins, wherein such principles shall be laid