A64002:1518
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.
In the next place this Author saith, this was also the opinion of Solomon. Better is he then both they, which hath not yet been; The words, saith he, do clearly show that Solomon did think it 1better to be dead and deprived of being, then to be oppressed of the mighty, and to have no comforters, that is then to have a miserable and mournful being. Surely Solomon was not ignorant that of them that are dead there are two conditions; some in the state of damnation; others in the state of salvation. To be with God in the state of salvation, we make no question but that it is a better condition, then to be living here on the earth in the greatest happiness that the world can afford. But to be dead and in the state of damnation, can it enter into the heart of any sober Christian, to believe that Solomon ever thought such a condition to be better then to live here on earth, in the most afflicted condition that is incident to the sons of men? And doth this Author well in coupling death with deprivation of being, as if every one, or any one that is dead were deprived of being? Surely all the dead are not deprived of all kind of living. For God is the Father of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; And he is not the God of the dead but of the living. Again consider who are more oppressed by the men of this world then the Children of God? For as our Saviour told his disciples The world will love her own, but because ye are not of the world, and I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you All that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer 2persecution, saith Paul, and through manifold temptations we must enter into the kingdom of God. And our Saviour forewarned his disciples, Ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake. Now is it credible, that, this Author should believe or conceive that ever King Solomon was of such an opinion, as to profess, that it is better for the Children of God to be deprived of being then to live in oppression? Consider farther, the words chiefly pertinent to this Authors purpose alleged out of King Solomon are these, Better then they both is he which hath not yet been. Now I presume this is spoken not of such an one, who as yet hath not been; though hereafter he shall be.
In the next place this Authour saith, this was also the opinion of Solomon. Better is he then both they, which hath not yet been; The words, saith he, do clearly shew that Solomon didthinke it