In the meantime, till answers come to hand, Mr Goodwin proffers to prove by two arguments (one clear answer had been more fair), that these acts of God, calling, justification, and so the rest, have no such connection between them, but that the one of them may be taken and be put in execution, and yet not the other, in respect of the same persons.
His first reason is this : " If the apostle should frame this series or chain of divine acts with an intent to show or teach the uninterrup- tibleness of it, in what case or cases soever, he should fight against his general and main scope or design in that part of the chapter which lieth from verse 1 7, which clearly is this, to encourage them to constancy and perseverance in suffering afflictions: for to sug- gest any such thing as that, being called and justified, nothing could hinder them from being glorified, were to furnish them with a ground on which to neglect his exhortation; for who will be persuaded to suffer tribulation for the obtaining of that which they have sufficient assurance given that they shall obtain whether they suffer such thmgs or no? Therefore, certainly, the apostle did not intend here to teach the certainty of perseverance in those that are justified."
Ans. That this argument is of such a composition as not to operate much in the case in hand will easily appear; for,^ —
172 DOCTRINE OF THE saints' TERSEVERANCE. [CHAP.
First, These expressions, " In what case or cases soever," are foisted into the sense and sentence of them whom he opposes, who affirm the acts of God's grace here mentioned to be effectually and virtually preventive of those cases, and of [that] which might possibly give ajiy interruption to the series of them.
Secondly, Whatsoever is here pretended of the main scope of the chapter, the scope of the place we have under consideration was granted before to be the making good of that assertion, premised in the head thereof, that all things should work together for good to believers, and that so to make it good, that upon the demonstration of it they might triumph with joy and exultation; which it cannot be denied but that this uninterruptible series of divine acts, not framed by the apostle, but revealed by the Holy Ghost, is fitted and suited to do.
Thirdly, Suppose that be the scope of the foregoing verses, what is there in the thesis insisted on and the sense embraced by us op- posite thereunto? "Why, to suggest any such thing to them as that, being called and justified, nothing could possibly interpose to hinder them from being glorified, — that is, that God by his grace will preserve them from departing wilfully from him, and will in Jesus Christ establish his love to them for ever, — was to furnish them with a motive to neglect his exhortations." Yea, but this kind of arguing we call here petitio principii, and it is accounted with us nothing valid ; the thing in question is produced as the medium to argue by. We affirm there is no stronger motive possible to encourage them to perseverance than this proposed. " It is otherwise," saith Mr Goodwin ; and its being otherwise in his opinion is the medium whereby he disproves not only that, but another truth, which he also opposeth ! But he adds this reason, " For who Avould be persuaded to suffer," etc. ; that is, it is impossible for any one industriously and carefully to use the means for the attainment of any end, if he hath assurance of the end by these means to be obtained. What need Hezekiah make use of food, or other means of sustaining his life, when he was assured that he should live fifteen years? The perseverance of the saints is not in the Scripture, nor by any of those wliom Mr Goodwin hath chosen to oppose, held out on any such ridiculous terms as whether they use means or use them not, carry themselves well or wickedly mis- carry themselves, but is asserted upon the account of God's effectual grace preserving them in the use of the means, and from all such miscarriages as should make a total separation between God and their souls. So that this first reason is but a plain begging of those things which, to use his own language, he would not dig for.
But perhaps, although this first argument of Mr Goodwin be nothing but an importune suggestion of some hypotheses of his own, with an arguing from inferences not only questionable but unques-
111.] THE IMMUTABILITY OF THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 1 73
tionably false, yet if his second demonstration will evince the matter under debate, he may be content to suffer loss in the hay and stubble of the first, so that the gold of the following argument do abide. Now, thus he proceedeth in these words: " And, lastly, this demon- strates the same thing yet farther. If God should justify all without exception whom he calleth, and that against all bars of wickedness and unbelief possible to be laid in their way by those who are called, then might ungodly and unbelieving persons inherit the kingdom of God. The reason of the connection is evident, it being a knoAvn truth that the persons justified are in a condition or present capacity of inheriting the kingdom of God."