A64002:1455
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.
Sect. 2. Containing the first Objection with the answer thereunto devised, and my reply thereupon and an answer thereunto.
M. Mason's Additions p. 16. 17.
M. Mason's Additons p. 16. 17.
But God say some is sovereign Lord of all creatures, they are truly and properly his own. Cannot he therefore dispose of them as he pleaseth and do with his own what he will?1 The question is not what an almighty sovereign power can do to poor vassals, but what a power that is just and good may do. By the power of a Lord his absolute and naked power he can cast away the whole 2mass of mankind; for it is not repugnant to Omnipotency or sovereignty, but by the power of a Judge, to wit, that actual power of his, which is always clothed with goodness and justice, he cannot. For it is not compatible with these properties in God to appoint men to hell of his mere will and pleasure; no fault at all of theirs preexisting in his eternal mind. It is not compatible with justice which is a constant will of rendering to every one his due; and that is vengeance to whom vengeance belongeth, namely to the obstinate and impenitent. God is good, saith Saint Austin, and God is just, he may without any desert free men from punishment, because he is good; But he cannot without evil deserving condemn any man, because he is just. In an other place also he saith, If God be believed to condemn any man that by sin deserves it not, he is not to be believed to be free from injustice. 2. Nor is it compatible with goodness which is an inclination in God of communicating that good which is in himself unto his creatures, as far as he can without wronging his justice. And therefore if God be (as the Scripture reporteth him) good to all; it cannot be that he should of himself without any motive in the reasonable creature, provide for it from everlasting the greatest of all miseries, and that before he thought of making it or bestowing any good upon it.