A64002:1513
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
The Answer to the Additions. › Part 1 › Section 6: The 6. Sect:
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.
The 6. Sect:
To the reason on which the reply is grounded, which is melius est esse, quàm non esse. It is better to be, then to have no being. I answer that it is a Sophism or, a fallacy a non distributo ad distributum. To be in it self is 1better then not to be, but it is not universally true in all particulars. Again it is true in some cases, & ex hypothesi, ⟨p. 45⟩si caetera sint paria; If there be any equality in the Adjuncts, It is so far from being simply true; that our Saviour limiteth it, and putteth a case wherein it is not true but the contrary to it is true: That is the case of Judas of which we have said somewhat before. It had been good &c. Which words St. Hierome expounding saith; it is simply and plainly averred by our Saviour, that it is better to have no being, then an evil being. This was the judgment too of Job. Why died I not saith he, in the birth? why did the knees prevent me? and why 2did I suck the breasts? For now should I have lien still, and been quiet, and should have slept then and been at rest. In which words he plainly implieth, that he thought it better to have had no birth and being, then such a painful and miserable being. This was also the opinion of Solomon. So I returned saith he, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun; and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter &c. Wherefore I praised the dead which are already dead, more then the living which are yet alive. Yea better is he, then both they, which hath not yet been, who hath not seen the evil works that are done under the sun. The words do clearly show that Solomon did think it better to be dead, and to be deprived of being, then to be oppressed by the mighty, and to be without comforters, that is then to have a miserable and mournful being.
To the reason on which the reply is grounded, which is melius est esse, quàm non esse. It is better to be, then to have no being. I answer that it is a Sophisme or, a fallacy a non distributo ad distributum. To be in it selfe is