A64002:1578
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.
but no such thing is found in Calvin. And it may be that is the fault of the Printers mistaking. And Marlorat's own exposition succeeds in a few words thus. Quae ideò dicuntur non ut fideles inde ansam arripiant de suâ salute dubitandi sed ut carnalis securitas & ignavia ab hominibus tollatur. And the next sentence whence this question is taken seems to cohere with this, though a great C. as if it were Calvin's comes in between, and it begins thus. Certum est enim dècretum Dei à nemine infirmari posse; quia Deus non est ut homo qui poenitentiam agat, & retractet sententiam semel decretam. Then follows the passage here alleged, and at the heels of it these words: Time igitur, & in solam Domini eligentis manum respice ut salutem per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum assequaris. Undoubtedly Marlorat approves of Brentius his exposition, otherwise he would not have placed it in his Expositio Ecclesiastica. Now Brentius brings in the very saying for which Maldonat is criminated, as the objection of some carnal person. Therefore when Marlorat seems to justify such a saying, it must be in another sense; and that either of good works in show, of which Brentius also observed, that such might have been found in Saul: Or of works in distinction from faith. And accordingly he concludes with exhortation fear: that is not to be secure, how good soever his works are; but to have an eye to God and trust only to him, that so he may obtain salvation through Jesus Christ. Calvin in Joh. 15. 6. Arescere dicuntur instar emortua sarmenta quae à Christo resecta; sunt quia sicuti initiū vigoris ab ipso est ita & continuus tenor. Non quòd ex electis aliquem contingat unquam execari: sed quia multae hypocritae in speciem ad tempus florent & virent, qui postea in reddendo fructu spem domini frustrantur. They are said to to wither like a branch cut off, such as are cut off from Christ: because like as the beginning of their vigour is from him, so also their continuance. Not that at any time it falleth out that any of Gods Elect is cut off, but because many Hypocrites carry a fair show for a time as if they were green and flourishing, who afterwards in rendering fruit make void the Lords Expectation.
but no such thing is found in Calvin. And it may be that is the fault of the Printers mistaking. And Marlorat's own exposition succeeds in a few words thus. Quae ideò dicuntur non ut fideles inde ansam arripiant de suâ salute dubitandi sed ut carnalis securitas & ignavia ab hominibus tollatur. And the next sentence whence this question is taken seems to cohere with this, though a great C. as if it were Calvin's comes in between, and it begins thus. Certum est enim dècretum Dei à nemine infirmari posse; quia Deus non est ut homo qui poenitentiam agat, & retractet sententiam semel decretam. Then followes the passage here alleadged, and at the heels of it these words: Time igitur, & in solam Domini eligentis manum respice ut salutem per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum assequaris. Undoubtedly Marlorat approves of Brentius his exposition, otherwise he would not have placed it in his Expositio Ecclesiastica. Now Brentius brings in the very saying for which Maldonat is criminated, as the objection of some carnall person. Therefore when Marlorat seems to justifie such a saying, it must be in another sense; and that either of good workes in shew, of which Brentius also observed, that such might have been found in Saul: Or of workes in distinction from faith. And accordingly he concludes with exhortation feare: that is not to be secure, how good soever his workes are; but to have an eye to God and trust only to him, that so he may obtain salvation through Jesus Christ. Calvin in