A64002:1786
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 Alvarez justifies him in this, professing herein that he speaks doctissimè & piissimè, most learned and holily. And in a peculiar disputation he maintains that the mystery of Gods providence and predestination, standing with the liberty of our wills, is incomprehensible by us in this world. Lastly, consider, this is delivered only of the first sin of our first parents, which this author perverts most shamefully, when he avoucheth that I should acknowledge our Divines, many of them, to embrace this way to avoid the imputation of making God the principal cause, not of Adams sin alone, but of sin in the greatest number of men. And to confess a truth, if sin be made the means for the procuring of the ends which God intends in predestination, undoubtedly God himself should be the author of sin. For whosoever intends any end, he, and none but he, must be author in working the means which tend to this end. Therefore I said, only that in this case, It seems that the sin of Adam was intended by God as the means; Whereas in truth and upon due consideration it appears that not the creatures sin, but Gods permission of the creatures sin, is the means whereby God brings to pass his glorious ends. Yet not the permission of sin alone, but joined together with the pardoning of it, and saving his elect in despite of it, is the complete means (together with the procuring of Christs merits) for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of mercy; And in like manner, not the permitting of sin alone, but joined with the punishment of it, is the complete means for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative, which in Scripture phrase is called, the declaration of his wrath. And whereas I said that hereby it seemed that it could not by any sound reason be manifested, that God was not the Author 1of sin, by the first way, this Author avoucheth of the defenders of the lower way which seems most temperate, that from their conclusions it followeth evidently, that of all the sins of Reprobates, which are the greatest number by many degrees, God is the true and principal Author. Observe, this (he saith) followeth evidently from their conclusions; and forthwith he tells us that he thinks so, or, to his thinking, it doth so. And why is he not the Author of all the sins of the elect also?
And Alvarez justifies him in this, professing herein that he speakes doctissimè & piissimè, most learned and holyly. And in a peculiar disputation he maintaines that the mistery of Gods providence and predestination, standing with the liberty of our wills, is incomprehensible by us in this world. Lastly, consider, this is delivered only of the first sinne of our first parents, which this authour perverts most shamefully, when he avoucheth that I should acknowledge our Divines, many of them, to embrace this way to avoyd the imputation of making God the principall cause, not of Adams sinne alone, but of sinne in the greatest number of men. And to confesse a truth, if sinne be made the meanes for the procuring of the ends which God intends in predestination, undoubtedly God himselfe should be the authour of sinne. For whosoever intends any end, he, and none but he, must be authour in working the meanes which tend to this end. Therefore I said, only that in this case, It seemes that the sinne of Adam was intended by God as the meanes; Whereas in truth and upon due consideration it appeares that not the creatures sinne, but Gods permission of the creatures sinne, is the meanes whereby God brings to passe his glorious ends. Yet not the permission of sinne alone, but joyned together with the pardoning of it, and saving his elect in despight of it, is the compleat meanes (together with the procuring of Christs merits) for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of mercy; And in like manner, not the permitting of sinne alone, but joyned with the punishment of it, is the compleat meanes for the manifestation of Gods glory in the way of justice vindicative, which in Scripture phrase is called, the declaration of his wrath. And whereas I said that hereby it seemed that it could not by any sound reason be manifested, that God was not the Authour