Works of John Bunyan Volume II Part 72

Ans. That G.o.d hath ordained (Jude 4), the d.a.m.nation of some of his creatures, it is evident; but whether this his determination be positive and absolute, there is the question: for the better understanding whereof, I shall open unto you the variety of G.o.d's determinations, and their nature, as also rise.

The determinations of G.o.d touching the destruction of the creature, they are either ordinary or extraordinary: those I count ordinary that were commonly p.r.o.nounced by the prophets and apostles, &c., in their ordinary way of preaching; to the end men might be affected with the love of their own salvation: now these either bound or loosed, but as the condition or qualification was answered by the creature under sentence, and no otherwise (1 Sam 12:25; Isa 1:20; Matt 18:3; Luke 13:1-3; Rom 2:8,9, 8:13, 11:23; 1 Cor 6:9-11).

Again, These extraordinary, though they respect the same conditions, yet they are not grounded immediately upon them, but upon the infallible fore-knowledge and fore-sight of G.o.d, and are thus distinguished. First the ordinary determination, it stands but at best upon a supposition that the creature may continue in sin, and admits of a possibility that it may not; but the extraordinary stands upon an infallible fore-sight that the creature will continue in sin; wherefore this must needs be positive, and as infallible as G.o.d himself.

Again, These two determinations are also distinguished thus: the ordinary is applicable to the elect as well as to the reprobate, but the other to the reprobate only. It is proper to say even to the elect themselves, 'He that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be d.a.m.ned'; but not to say to them, These are appointed to UTTER destruction, or that they shall utterly perish in their own corruptions; or that for them is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever (1 Kings 20:42; 2 Peter 2:12; Jude 13).

So then, though G.o.d by these determinations doth not lay some under irrecoverable condemnation, yet by one of them he doth; as is further made out thus:

1. G.o.d most perfectly foreseeth the final impenitency of those that so die, from the beginning to the end of the world (Prov 15:11; Psa 139:2; Isa 46:10).

2. Now from this infallible foresight, it is most easy and rational to conclude, and that positively, the infallible overthrow of every such creature. Did I infallibly foresee that this or that man would cut out his heart in the morning, I might infallibly determine his death before night.

Object. But still the question is, Whether G.o.d by this his determination doth not lay a necessity on the creature to sin? For, no sin, no condemnation: this is true by your own a.s.sertion.

Ans. No, by no means: for,

1. Though it be true, that sin must of absolute necessity go before the infallible condemnation and overthrow of the sinner; and that it must also be pre-considered by G.o.d; yet it needs not lay a necessity upon him to sin: for let him but alone to do what he will, and the determination cannot be more infallible than the sin, which is the cause of its execution.

2. As it needs not, so it doth not: for this positive determination is not grounded upon what G.o.d will effect, but on what the creature will; and that not through the instigation of G.o.d, but the instigation of the devil. What? might not I, if I most undoubtedly foresaw that such a tree in my garden would only c.u.mber the ground, notwithstanding reasonable means, might not I, I say, from hence determine, seven years before, to cut it down, and burn it in the fire, but I must, by so determining, necessitate this tree to be fruitless? the case in hand is the very same. G.o.d therefore may most positively determine the infallible d.a.m.nation of his creature, and yet not at all necessitate the creature to sin, that he might be d.a.m.ned.

Object. But how is this similitude pertinent? For G.o.d did not only foresee sin would be the destruction of the creature, but let it come into the world, and so destroy the creature. If you, as you foresee the fruitlessness of your tree, should withal see that which makes it so, and that too before it makes it so, and yet let the impediment come and make it so; are not you now the cause of the unfruitfulness of that tree which you have before condemned to the fire to be burned? for G.o.d might have chose whether he would have let Adam sin, and so sin to have got into the world by him.

Ans. Similitudes never answer every way; if they be pertinent to that for which they are intended, it is enough; and to that it answereth well, being brought to prove no more but the natural consequence of a true and infallible foresight. And now as to what is objected further, as that G.o.d might have chose whether sin should have come into the world by Adam, to the destruction of so many: to that I shall answer,

1. That sin could not have come into the world without G.o.d's permission, it is evident, both from the perfection of his foresight and power.

2. Therefore all the means, motives, and inducements thereunto, must also by him be not only foreseen, but permitted.

3. Yet so, that G.o.d will have the timing, proceeding, bounding, and ordering thereof, at his disposal: 'Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee, and the remainder of wrath shalt thou restrain'

(Psa 76:10; 1 Kings 22:20-22; John 8:20; Luke 22:51,52).

4. Therefore it must needs come into the world, not without, but by the knowledge of G.o.d; not in despite of him, but by his suffering of it.

Object. But how then is he clear from having a hand in the death of him that perisheth?

Ans. Nothing is more sure than that G.o.d could have kept sin out of the world, if it had been his will; and this is also as true, that it never came into the world with his liking and compliance; and for this, you must consider that sin came into the world by two steps:

1. By being offered. 2. By prevailing.

Touching the first of these, G.o.d without the least injury to any creature in heaven or earth, might not only suffer it, but so far countenance the same: that is, so far forth as for trial only: as it is said of Abraham; 'G.o.d tempted Abraham' to slay his only son (Gen 22:1), and led Christ by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil (Mark 1:12; Luke 4:1). This is done without any harm at all; nay, it rather produceth good; for it tends to discover sincerity, to exercise faith in, and love to his Creator; also to put him in mind of the continual need he hath of depending on his G.o.d for the continuation of help and strength, and to provoke to prayers to G.o.d, whenever so engaged (Deut 8:1-3; 1 Peter 1:7; Heb 5:7; Matt 26:22,41).

Object. But G.o.d did not only admit that sin should be offered for trial, and there to stay; but did suffer it to prevail, and overcome the world.

Ans. Well, this is granted: but yet consider,

1. G.o.d did neither suffer it, nor yet consent it should, but under this consideration; If Adam, upright Adam, gave way thereto, by forsaking his command, 'In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die' (Gen 2:17, 3:3). Which Adam did, not because G.o.d did compel him or persuade him to it, but voluntarily of his own mind, contrary to his G.o.d's command: so then, G.o.d by suffering sin to break into the world, did it rather in judgment, as disliking Adam's act, and as a punishment to man for listening to the tempter; and as a discovery of his anger at man's disobedience; than to prove that he is guilty of the misery of his creature.

2. Consider also, that when G.o.d permitted sin for trial, it was, when offered first, to them only who were upright, and had sufficient strength to resist it.

3. They were by G.o.d's command to the contrary, driven to no strait to tempt them to incline to Satan: 'Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely at,' saith G.o.d; only let this alone.

4. As touching the beauty and goodness that was in the object unto which they were allured; What was it? Was it better than G.o.d? Yea, was it better than the tree of life? For from that they were not exempted till after they had sinned. Did not G.o.d know best what was best to do them good?

5. Touching him that persuaded them to do this wicked act; was his word more to be valued for truth, more to be ventured on for safety, or more to be honoured for the worthiness of him that spake, than was his that had forbad it? The one being the devil, with a lie, and to kill them; the other being G.o.d, with his truth, and to preserve them safe.

Quest. But was not Adam unexpectedly surprised? Had he notice beforehand, and warning of the danger? For G.o.d foresaw the business.

Ans. Doubtless G.o.d was fair and faithful to his creature in this thing also; as clearly doth appear from these considerations.

1. The very commandment that G.o.d gave him, fore-bespake him well to look about him; and did indeed insinuate that he was likely to be tempted.

2. It is yet more evident, because G.o.d doth even tell him of the danger; 'In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.'

3. Nay G.o.d by speaking to him of the very tree that was to be forborn, telling him also where it stood, that he might the better know it; did in effect expressly say unto him, Adam, if thou be tempted, it will be about that tree, and the fruit thereof: wherefore if thou findest the tempter there, then beware thy life.

(1.) To conclude then: though sin did not come into the world without G.o.d's sufferance, yet it did without his liking: G.o.d suffered also Cain to kill his brother, and Ishmael to mock at Isaac, but he did not like the same (Gen 4:9-11; Gal 4:30).

(2.) Therefore though G.o.d was first in concluding sin should be offered to the world; yet man was the first that consented to a being overcome thereby.

(3.) Then, Though G.o.d did fore-determine that sin should enter, yet it was not but with respect to certain terms and conditions, which yet was not to be enforced by virtue of the determination, but permitted to be completed by the voluntary inclination of a perfect and upright man. And in that the determination was most perfectly infallible, it was through the foresight of the undoubted inclination of this good and upright person.

Quest. But might not G.o.d have kept Adam from inclining, if he would?

Ans. What more certain? But yet consider,

1. Adam being now an upright man, he was able to have kept himself, had he but looked to it as he should and might.

2. This being so, if G.o.d had here stept in, he had either added that which had been needless, and so had not obtained thankfulness; or else had made the strength of Adam useless, yea his own workmanship in so creating him, superfluous; or else by consequence imperfect.

(3.) If he had done so, he had taken Adam from his duty, which was to trust and believe his Maker; he had also made void the end of the commandment, which was to persuade to watchfulness, diligence, sobriety, and contentedness; yea, and by so doing would not only himself have tempted Adam to transgression, even to lay aside the exercise of that strength that G.o.d had already given him; but should have become the pattern, or the first father to all looseness, idleness, and neglect of duty. Which would also not only have been an ill example to Adam to continue to neglect so reasonable and wholesome duties, but would have been to himself an argument of defence to retort upon his G.o.d, when he had come at another time to reckon with him for his misdemeanours.[6]

Many other weighty reasons might here be further added for G.o.d's vindication in this particular, but at this time let these suffice.

CHAPTER 7.

Whether any under Eternal Reprobation have just cause to quarrel with G.o.d for not electing of them?

That the answer to this question may be to edification, recall again what I have before a.s.serted; to wit, That for a man to be left out of G.o.d's election, and to be made a sinner, is two things; and again, For a man to be not elect, and to be condemned to h.e.l.l-fire, is two things also. Now I say, if non-election makes no man a sinner, and if it appoints no man to condemnation neither, then what ground hath any reprobate to quarrel with G.o.d for not electing of him? Nay, further, reprobation considereth him upright, leaveth him upright, and so turneth him into the world; what wrong doth G.o.d do him, though he hath not elected him? What reason hath he that is left in this case to quarrel against his Maker?

If thou say, because G.o.d hath not chosen them, as well as chosen others: I answer, 'Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against G.o.d? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?' (Rom 9:20). 'Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in my hand, O house of Israel,'

saith the Lord G.o.d (Jer 18:6). So then, if I should say no more but that G.o.d is the only Lord and Creator, and that by his sovereignty he hath power to dispose of them according to his pleasure, either to choose or to refuse, according to the counsel of his own will, who could object against him and be guiltless? 'He giveth not account of any of his matters' (Job 33:13). 'And what his soul desireth, even that he doeth' (Job 23:13).

Again, G.o.d is wiser than man, and therefore can shew a reason for what he acts and does, both when and where at present thou seest none. Shall G.o.d the only wise, be arraigned at the bar of thy blind reason, and there be judged and condemned for his acts done in eternity? Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, 'or who hath been his counsellor?' (Rom 11:34). Do you not know that he is far more above us, than we are above our horse or mule that is without understanding? 'Great things doeth he, which we cannot comprehend' (Job 37:5). 'Great things and unsearchable, marvellous things without number' (Job 5:9).

But, I say, should we take it well if our beast should call us to account for this and the other righteous act, and judge us unrighteous, and our acts ridiculous, and all because it sees no reason for our so doing? Why, we are as beasts before G.o.d (Psa 73:22).