A64002:158
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.
And in what congruity can it be said, that God bid Shimei to curse David, but that in the same analogy of faith, it may be said, that God bid Job's Wife in this manner to tempt him? And which of the two was the greatest provocation, Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero; or Shimei's provocation of David railing on him to his face, the Subject blaspheming his Prince? undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior, only here was the difference; Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero, God gave no such commandment (in proper speech) unto Shimei, but rather commanded the contrary in his law, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people. But Gods secret providence, whereby he makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them, even of Devils and wicked men, to serve his turn by them, either in the way of judgement, or in the way of mercy, and sometimes for trial of the faith and patience of his children, is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding. And indeed it is far more effectual then his commandment. And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth, spareth not to profess as much in these words, His & talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est, satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum, judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo. De Grat. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei, inquiring about the interpretation of it, see I pray, how he resolves concerning it. Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David, Quis sapiens & intelliget. Non enim jubendo dixit, ubi obedientia laudaretur, sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Ideò dictum est, dixit ei dominus. Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo, laudandus potius quam puniendus esset, sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum. And he proceeds farther to show the reason of this divine providence.
And in what congruity can it be said, that God bid Shimei to curse David, but that in the same analogy of faith, it may be said, that God bid Iobes Wife in this manner to tempt him? And which of the two was the greatest provocation, Tiberius his Ministers Provocation of Drusus and Nero; or Shimei's provocation of David rayling on him to his face, the Subject blaspheaming his Prince? undoubtedly the provocation was nothing inferior, only here was the difference; Tiberius gave such commandment to his Ministers so to provoke Drusus and Nero, God gave no such commandement (in proper speech) unto Shimei, but rather commanded the contrary in his law, Thou shalt not speak evill of the ruler of thy people. But Gods secret providence, whereby he makes use of all his creatures in what condition soever he finds them, even of Devills and wicked men, to serve his turne by them, either in the way of judgement, or in the way of mercy, and sometimes for triall of the faith and patience of his children, is in Scripture phrase called Gods bidding or commanding. And indeed it is farre more effectuall then his commandment. And Austin by pregnant passages of holy Scripture convicted of this truth, spareth not to professe as much in these words, His & talibus testimoniis divinorum eloquiorum quae omnia commemorare nimis longum est, satis quantum existimo manifestatur operari Deum in cordibus hominum ad inclinandas eorum voluntates quocunquè voluerit sive ad bona pro suâ misericordiâ, sive ad mala pro meritis eorum, judicio utique suo, aliquando aperto, aliquando occulto, semper autem justo. De Grat. & lib. Arbitr. cap. 21. And touching this particular case of Shimei, inquiring about the interpretation of it, see I pray, how he resolves concerning it. Quomodo dixerit dominus huic homini maledicere David, Quis sapiens & intelliget. Non enim jubendo dixit, ubi obedientia laudaretur, sed quod ejus voluntatem proprio vitio suo malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo & occulto inclinavit. Ideò dictum est, dixit ei dominus. Nam si jubenti obtemper asset Deo, laudandus potius quam puniendus esset, sicut ex hoc peccato posteà novimus esse punitum. And he proceeds farther to shew the reason of this divine providence.