The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute…The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute…

First therefore consider, is it fit to resist the evidence of divine truth, because it is harsh to mens affections?

Secondly, Wherein consists this harshness? Is it in this, that nothing is the cause of Gods decree? and will nothing temper the harshness of it, unless a thing temporal as sin, be made the cause of Gods will, which is eternal and even God himself? But let us deal plainly, and tell me in truth, whether the harshness doth not consist in this, That the mere pleasure of Gods will, seems to be made the cause, not of Gods decree only, but of damnation also; as if God did damn men, not for sin, but of his mere pleasure. And this I confess is wondrous harsh, and yet no more harsh then it is untrue, though in this juggling world, things are so carried by some, who will both shuffle, and cut, and deal themselves, as if we made God of mere pleasure to damn men, and not for sin, which is a thing utterly impossible: damnation being such a notion, as hath essential reference unto sin. But if God damn no man but for sin, and decreed to damn no man but for sin, what if the mere pleasure of God be the cause of this decree; what harshness I say is this? As for example, Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act, and gave up both lust and ghost together, so going as it were quick to Hell, never fearing the judgements of God, until they felt them. If we say, God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs, and be damned for it, What harshness I pray in this, though God made this decree of mere pleasure? For is it not manifest he did? For could he not if it had pleased him, have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs, and given them space for repentance, and not space only, but grace also for repentance, seeing as Austin saith, Quantamlibet praebuerit ¹Patientiam, nisi Deus dederit, quis aget Paenitentiam.

Secondly, Wherein consists this harshnesse? Is it in this, that nothing is the cause of Gods decree? and will nothing temper the harshnes of it, unles a thing temporall as sinne, be made the cause of Gods will, which is eternall and even God himselfe? But let us deale plainly, and tell me in truth, whether the harshnes doth not consist in this, That the meer pleasure of Gods will, seems to be made the cause, not of Gods decree only, but of damnation also; as if God did damne men, not for sin, but of his meer pleasure. And this I confesse is wondrous harsh, and yet no more harsh then it is untrue, though in this jugling world, things are so carried by some, who will both shuffle, and cutt, and deale themselves, as if we made God of meer pleasure to damne men, and not for sin, which is a thing utterly impossible: damnation being such a notion, as hath essentiall reference unto sin. But if God damne no man but for sinne, and decreed to damne no man but for sinne, what if the meer pleasure of God be the cause of this decree; what harshnes I say is this? As for example, Zimri or Cosby perished in their incestuous act, and gave up both lust and ghost together, so going as it were quick to Hell, never fearing the judgements of God, untill they felt them. If we say, God decreed they should be cut off in this sin of theirs, and be damned for it, What hatshnes I pray in this, though God made this decree of meer pleasure? For is it not manifest he did? For could he not if it had pleased him, have caused them to outlive this sin of theirs, and given them space for repentance, and not space only, but grace also for repentance, seeing as Austin saith, Quantamlibet praebuerit