A64002:1302
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…
The riches of Gods love unto the vessels of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessels of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entitled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two books, the first being a refutation of the said book, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hord's discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceals his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twice ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twice from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeans ...The riches of Gods love unto the vessells of mercy, consistent with his absolute hatred or reprobation of the vessells of wrath, or, An answer unto a book entituled, Gods love unto mankind ... in two bookes, the first being a refutation of the said booke, as it was presented in manuscript by Mr Hord unto Sir Nath. Rich., the second being an examination of certain passages inserted into M. Hords discourse (formerly answered) by an author that conceales his name, but was supposed to be Mr Mason ... / by ... William Twisse ... ; whereunto are annexed two tractates of the same author in answer unto D.H. ... ; together with a vindication of D. Twisse from the exceptions of Mr John Goodwin in his Redemption redeemed, by Henry Jeanes ...
Oxford: printed by L.L. and H.H. for Tho. Robinson, 1653
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
TWICE. Consideration.
TWISSE. Consideration.
1. Here in this Section the question is, Whether our Doctrine of absolute Reprobation, bereaves a Minister of the solid grounds of comfort? Still we must remember how magnificently this Author goes on, to confound things that differ. For whereas we maintain that God hath decreed to proceed absolutely with men, only in the giving and denying of grace, not absolutely in the giving of salvation, or inflicting of damnation. And this Author, though he so carrieth the matter all along, as if we maintained Gods proceeding to be absolute herein, to wit, in granting salvation to some, and inflicting damnation upon others, yet hath he no means to help himself herein, and cast a show of a true crimination, but by flying to Gods absolute proceedings, in giving or denying grace. And albeit in this point, wholly consists the Crisis of this Controversy, yet this Author utterly declines the sifting thereof, as some precipice and break-neck unto his cause; to wit, Whether God gives and denies grace according to the mere pleasure of his will, or according to mens works; albeit the issue of all his comforts comes to this, namely, that either God is not the Author of our faith, (which now adays the Remonstrants with open mouth profess, that Christ merited for none,) or if to juggle with the World they pretend an acknowledgement, that God is the Author of it, yet they plainly profess, that he dispenseth it to some, and denies it to others, according to some good condition, or disposition, he finds in the one, and which he finds not in another. But let us take into consideration what these solid grounds of comfort are, whereof a Minister is bereaved by our Doctrine; Three I find here mentioned; A treble Universality. 1. of Gods love. 2. Of Christs death. 3. Of the Covenant of grace. As if universality now adays were a better Character of the Arminian faith, then of the Roman Religion. I may take liberty to equivocate a little, when this Author equivocates throughout, and that in a case, wherein i• is most intolerable, in a case of consolation to be ministered to conscientia timorata, as Nider calls it, a poor afflicted soul as this Author expresseth it.