A64002:1540
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.
What a madness therefore is it to impute that to God which cannot be justly fathered upon the Devil. 2. He cannot be a punisher of sin: For none can justly punish those offences of which they are the 1Authors. This is Prospers argument too. It is against reason to say that he with is the damner of the Devil would have any one to be the devils Servant. This reason Fulgentius useth likewise illius rei Deus ultor est, cujus Auhor non est. Tertullian also before them hath said. He is not to be accounted the Author of sin, who is the forbidder yea and the condemner of it. 3. He cannot be God, because he should not be just, nor holy, nor the Judge of the world, all properties essential to God. And this is Basil's reason, who hath written a whole Homily against this wicked assertion. It is all one (saith he) to say that God is the Author of sin, and to say he is not God. 3 Upon these and the like considerations I may well conclude, that, the opinion which chargeth God with the sins of men, is neither good nor true.
What a madnesse therefore is it to impute that to God which cannot be justly fathered upon the Divell. 2. He cannot be a punisher of sinne: For none can justly punish those effences of which they are the 1Authors. This is Prospers argument too. It is against reason to say that he wich is the damner of the Devill would have any one to be the devills Servant. This reason Fulgentius useth likewise illius rei Deus ultor est, cujus Auhor non est. Tertullian also before them hath sayd. He is not to be accounted the Author of sinne, who is the forbidder yea and the condemner of it. 3. He cannot be God, because he should not be just, nor holy, nor the Judge of the world, all properties essentiall to God. And this is Basil's reason, who hath written a whole Homily against this wicked assertion. It is all one (saith he) to say that God is the Author of sinne, and to say he is not God. 3 Upon these and the like considerations I may well conclude, that, the opinion which chargeth God with the sinnes of men, is neither good nor true.
- 1Resp. Obi. 4. Vincent l. 1. ad Monim. c. 19. l. 2. cont. Marcion. c. 9 Basil. Homil. Quod Deus non est &c.