former place de generibus singulorum, it was not to be taken distributively, which is a ve∣ry shallow conceit, for it is apparent we distribute it de generibus singulorum; and more then that, of the particulars of each kind, only we doe not distribute it of all the particulars. In like manner, though the Text in this place expresseth a distribution, saying, not willing, any to perish, this distribution is not extended to all: Nay, it ad∣mits of a greater limitation then the former place did by our interpretation; for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here must be referred to that which goes before in these words, God is patient to us ward not willing any to perish, that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, any of us to perish, but all to come to re∣pentance, that is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all of us; which can admit of no other sense then all such as the Apostle was; he saith it is contrary to absolute reprobation; that is wind; when he proveth it then we will believe it, his word is no oracle.
2. Let us see how he disproves their interpretation, who accommodate it to Gods Elect. The persons here mentioned (he saith) are those towards whom God exerciseth long suffer∣ing and patience, and demandeth whether these are the Elect only or chiefly? and answer∣eth himselfe negatively; saying, that the reprobates are the proper objects of Gods long suffering and patience, which he proveth out of Rom. 2. 4. and Rom. 9. 22. and so concludes the ar∣gument very learnedly and judiciously Arminian like, ex omnibus affirmativis, in secundâ Figurâ; which of what force it is every weak Logician knoweth; for thus in effect is his argument, They of whom God will have none to perish, are such towards whom God expresseth much long suffering and patience; But the Reprobates are they towards whom God ex∣presseth much long suffering and patience; Therefore the Reprobates are they, of whom God will have none to perish.
2. And whereas the Apostle saith, God is patient towards us, the meaning according to this Authors judicious enlargement is, towards us who are partly elect and partly reprobates: and so likewise when he saith, 2 Pet. 1. 2. To you who have obtained like precious faith with us, that is, with us of whom some are elect and some reprobates. And 1 Pet. 1. 3. God hath begot∣ten us to a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, that is, begotten us, some of whom are elect and some reprobates.
3. Now because the Apostle saith plainly and simply, who is patient towards us; this Author desiring to frame it in a suitable manner, to that of the Apostle, Rom. 2. 4. whereunto he hath a hungry desire to reduce it, therefore he makes bold to say, that the persons here mentioned by Saint Peter are such, towards whom God exerciseth long suf∣fering and patience: Thus again he is willing very obsequiously to follow Lysanders counsell, who advised, when a Lyons skinne would not serve the turne, to piece it up with a Foxe skinne. We on the other side, though it cannot be denied, but that God doth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 towards such as Saint Peter was, and those to whom he wrote, who had obtained like precious faith with himselfe and his fellow Apostles, and other believers; which cannot be denied to have been the elect of God, (so he calls them to whom he wrote, 1 Pet. 1. 2.) yet we spare to draw any argument therehence, because we know ful well, that God doth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and useth long suffering towards the Repro∣bates also. So that we could not conclude that we would herehence, but either by a Syllogisme vitious in the forme, as this Author doth, or by a Syllogisme, that would be as faulty in the matter, thus; God shewes patience to none but Repro∣bates; they of whom God will have none to perish are such, as towards whom God shewes patience; therefore God will not have any Reprobate to perish. And is not this a proper doctrine, that God will not have any Reprobate to perish, both for the overthrowing of Gods omnipotency; for is it not a cleare case and undeniable, that all Reprobates doe perish? As also for the overthrowing of Gods immutability; for can it be denied, that when God damnes them, he will have them to perish? Which if before he would not, can it be avoided, but that Gods will must be changed? And lastly, for the bringing in of manifest contrariety into the will of God; seeing they dare not deny that God did from everlasting ordaine every reprobate unto damnati∣on: I say they dare not deny this in plain termes, though their carriage is such, as if their meaning were, that Gods will in decreeing their damnation is conditionall quoad actum volentis, as touching the very act of willing, whence it followeth that God shall not will their damnation untill their death in infidelity and impenitency; for it is fit the condition should exist before the thing conditionated, whose existence de∣pends thereupon. As for that he addes in the close, If they doe perish it is their own fault and folly; we make no question hereof, though neverthelesse we may well maintain, that it is Gods absolute pleasure, not to take them off from their sinfull and foolish