The general Contents of the several Chapters.
CHAP. I.
THe Introduction to an accompt of what hath passed from the beginning. The first occasion of the Di∣spute. The removal of a most wilful and groundless slander. The continuation of the Accompt. Seventeen Arguments to prove the positive Entity of Sin. Mr. Hick's interesting himself in an other mans Province. His laying the foundation of perfect Libertinism and Rantism: Occasioning 16 other Arguments for the positive Entity of sin. His Title page impertinent to his Book. A brief and general accompt of his whole Book. A Building made up of nothing, but one long Entry, and three back Doors. Mr. Hick. turns his back upon 14. Arguments at once. Nine more at once he passeth by without Answer. His pro∣mise of justifying the Schoolmen doth end in passing them over without regard. His widest back Door of all, at which he makes a most shameful and foul escape from the thing in question.
CHAP. II.
THe thing in Question from the beginning was Sin properly so called. How Mr. Hick. was frighted from it, in spite of S. Paul and Dr. Reynolds. Sin a Concrete: and so confessed by Mr. H. a little after he had deny'd it. The positive Act proved to be the sin of cursing God: Mr. H. (though challenged) not attempting to disprove it. No imaginable difference betwixt the positive Act of lying with Bathsheba, and the Adultery which was the sin; Sin con∣fessed by Dr. Twisse to include a positive Act. The same is confessed by Mr. Whitfield and Mr. Barlee, and (in lucid intervals) by Mr. H. himself: who writes against his own knowledge: and as much a∣gainst his own interest. 1. By the grosness of his own Falshood and Tergiversation. 2. by inferring that Vertue hath no positive Being. 3. by arming the Atheist against himself, in proving that God hath no positive Entity. 4. by putting it out of his power to deny he is a Brute, till he renounce his Transition à Thesi ad Hypothesin. The stone at which Mr. Hick. hath not stumbled only, but fallen, past all recovery. The true state of Sin (specified) as it differs from either part of Sin, and from Sinfulness it self. Mr. Hick. gets nothing though we should grant him his Reduplication, but rather looseth all he gapes at. Nay proves himself a Carneadist or Libertine. That Sin is positive and concrete may be concluded from Bonaventure.
CHAP. III.
MR. Hick's chief strength from Mr. Barlow's youngest writings. Why first encountred. An accompt of Dr. Fields Reasons for the positive Entity of sin. The first Reason: the second Reason. The first Reason was never answer'd. The second answer'd by Mr. Bar∣low in his younger years. The Answer shew'd to be invalid in 5 Re∣spects. 1. by its granting what it pretendeth to deny. 2. by imply∣ing a contradiction. 3. by being offensive to pious mindes. 4. by of∣fending against the Rules of sense. 5. by the twofold unfitness of the Simile alledg'd. Gulielmus de Rubione vindicated by way of Reply to Mr. Barlows Answer. Mr. H's answer proved vitious in 3 respects. 1. by such a gross Fallacy, as by which he is proved no man, but either a beast or somewhat worse. 2. by such a shifting from the Que∣stion, as proves him convinced of maintaining a gross error. 3. by Blasphemy expressed, and Contradiction implyed. A third Reason ta∣ken from H. Grotius amounting to the same with Iacobus Almain. Mr. Barlows Answer; proved faulty in 7 respects. The words of Ca∣preolus make for me. Mr. Barlows plea out of Hurtadus proved faulty in 6 Respects. The Act of Hating God now, and of sin hereafter, unduly taken to be the same Act. A Denyal of Positivity betrayes its Owners to deny a Reality in Sin. A fourth Reason out of Ioan∣nes de Rada. Mr. Barlows answer proved invalid in 4 Respects. A 5 Reason out of Aquinas. A Reply to the Answer of Mr. Barlow, proving it faulty in 3 Respects. Mr. Hick. contradicted by his Ma∣sters and himself too. A sixt Reason is taken out of Franciscus de Mayron, and divers others. Not answer'd by Mr. Barlow. A Seventh Reason alledged by several Authors, partly cited by Dr. Field. Mr. Barlows answer proved faulty in 5 Respects. An eighth Reason gathered out of Fran. Diotallevius: confirmed by a ninth Argu∣ment, leading the Adversary (Mr. Hick.) to the most horrid Ab∣surdities to be imagined. A tenth Argument or Reason out of Car∣dinal Cajetan. A 11th Argument collected from Episcopius. A 12th and 13th Argument urged by Dr. Stern in his Animi Medela. A 14 Argument out of D.R. Baron his Metaph. The arguments backt by the Authority of the most discerning: by the explicit and implicit Con∣f•ssions of the Adversaries. By ten several Confessions of Mr. Hick. himself.
CHAP. IV.
MR. Hicks Distinction of the positive Act of Hating God, and its obliquity, frees him not from making God the Author of sin. Proved first out of his mouth. Secondly by Reason. Thirdly by Authority in conjunction with Reason.
CHAP. V.
THe Positive Entity of Sin made undeniable from Scripture. God is the fittest to be Judge of what is properly called Sin. Con∣firmed by the Concurrence of Antient Fathers. The confession of Vossius for the greatest part of them. Apollinarius by name, and the greatest part of the Orientals, as Ierome witnesseth. Augustin held the propagation of the soul; and Original sin to be a positive Qua∣lity. The several wayes of reconciling such Writers unto them∣selves, who plainly holding the positivity of sin, do sometimes seem to speak against it. An Accident opposed to Res simpliciter. The Ma∣nichaean Haeresie occasioned some figurative expressions. Substantia expressed by Natura, Aliquid, and Res. Substance called hoc aliquid by all the Followers of Aristotle. All the Fathers grant sin to be an Act, and the work of our Will. How unhappily some men confu•e the Manichees. How the Sinner is able to give the whole being un∣to his sin. How they that deny it must submit to the Manichees, or worse. The Concurrence of the Learned, both Antient and Mo∣dern, for the Affirmative, That the sinful Agent is the sole Cause of the sinful Act. The power to Act is from God, but the vitious Acti∣on is not. Melancthon's distinction of the first Cause susteining, but not assisting the second in evill Actions.
CHAP. VI
AN Accompt of those things which Mr. Hick. calls his Artificial Arguments. Of twelve things answered, but 4 replyed to. A Rejoynder to the First: to the Second: to the Third: to the Fourth. His second Argument Artificial. How largely answered. His remarkable Tergiversation without the shadow of a Reply. His offers of Reason Why all things positive are from God, or God him∣self, and primarily none from Men or Devils. The Infirmities of the First. Of the Second: by which he is proved (out of his mouth) to be the worst of Blasphemers. Of the Third, wherein he makes God the Fountain of the Essence of sin. Of the Fourth, wherein he ascribeth unto God, what God ascribeth unto the Devil. His third Page [unnumbered] Argument Artificial. The positive Importance of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not consi∣dered by Mr. Barlow. The like Importance of Peccatum, proved by Reason and Experience. His Fourth and last Argument. A short accompt of those Shifts, which pretend to be Answers to some few Arguments. Of Sins being called the works of the Devil. His Con∣cessions and Contradictions about the Habit of Drunken•sse His Con∣cessions and Contradictions about the positive filth of Sin. His Con∣cession and Tergiversation concerning Blasphemy and Atheisme, &c. His Remarkable Forgery of an Argument in his Adversaries name. His stupendious Impertinence and supposal of Grace in Hell; or Some privation besides All. Of Sins working Concupiscence. Mr. Hicks Answer absurd in 8 Respects. Of the efficient Cause of Sin. Mr Hicks Conviction and Confession in despite of his whole Enterprise. Of Sins being Nothing, if no Effect. Mr. H's vain attempt to prove Knavery to be Nothing. The Cause of punishment. Mr. H's Denyal of any positive Damnation, unlesse he thinks it no punishment to be Damn'd.
